BCH

[Anonymous No.4696680]

Without any shilling or hyping, does anyone have a serious assessment of what to expect of BCH for the upcoming days, weeks and months? I'm aware of development, stage of adoption and general market opinions, but I'd like insight into actual market sentiment and which direction it may lie.

Happy to tip for genuinely resourceful information.

[Anonymous No.4696701]

It will come to be known solely as bcash.

[Anonymous No.4696735]

https://www.tradingview.com/chart/BCHUSD/ncDRIbXl-BCHUSD-new-update/

The top rated analyst on Trading View.

[Anonymous No.4696749]

>>4696680
Just another Altcoin tailing after Bitcoin and staying in the same Satoshi value.

[Anonymous No.4696756]

fundamentally it is bitcoin

this is as low as you will ever see it pic related

[Anonymous No.4696776]

>>4696756
This.

[Anonymous No.4696785]

>>4696756
Well done, Lad

[Anonymous No.4696789]

>>4696701
>>4696749
Thanks for not shilling.

>>4696735
Thanks. I do frequent tradingview, but I thought I'd see if anyone here wanted to weigh in their own findings.

>>4696756
I think I've got a solid grasp of the fundamentals, but honestly the overall state of the market has gotten me confused. As far as I see it, the current price could be either the highest or the lowest price we see in December easily, which is why I'm enquiring about expectations for the next days/weeks/months. Long term I believe all investments with fundamentals will 10x at least here, so not concerned about that.

[Anonymous No.4696791]

>>4696680
It is losing control of the "bitcoin" part of its name. Do not be surprised if, when the next round of exchanges go live with BCH pair trading, they all impose the Bcash name "to avoid confusion for users". Coinbase and Bitstamp are next, and neither is a fan of the fork.

On price, a seemingly growing portion of analysts see anything over 1000usd as artificial pump. Many say there is no inherent value above the 300usd ballpark. If this is the case, there is only so long the currency's backers can continue to stand for BCH sales at an overblown price. It will slowly come down and rediscover a natural price.

[Anonymous No.4696820]

>>4696756
What graph is that? You cropped out the bottom axis. This is the live BCH graph. Zoom out, and it's not so brutal. But it is still locked in a bear run.

[Anonymous No.4696823]

>>4696791
There is no inherent value on btc either. It's all speculation. The only coin that does something is Ethereum and it's incredibly overpriced.

[Anonymous No.4696848]

>>4696823
This. Bitcoin, like all crypto, are Ponzi schemes.

[Anonymous No.4696852]

>>4696823
Hey you're not allowed to talk about btcs inherent value in relation to Btrash ok?

[Anonymous No.4696854]

>>4696680
BTC difficulty will be rising at least 15% in about 6 days so expect some decent BCH upward action around then

[Anonymous No.4696868]

>>4696852
Wow. BTC is in freefall, and BCH is holding its own and up a bit. The Core Salt is palpable. lol

[Anonymous No.4696874]

>>4696820
must be log scale

[Anonymous No.4696886]

>>4696854
BCH just spiked up over $1400 again on Bithumb.

[Anonymous No.4696894]

>>4696680

im the average joe.

i old bitcoin cash because it have the bitcoin name (brand?) in it.

[Anonymous No.4696899]

[Anonymous No.4696918]

>>4696823
The inherent value of bitcoin at the moment is its fiat investment. Because BCH was launched as an airdrop, it does not have the assurances of fiat backing.

Now, we both know that fiat backing doesnät count for a lot. But it counts for a lot in terms of individual market psychology, when compared to a free gift. You think I care about dropping a token at $100 each, when I got them for free? I'm still up on my "initial investment" of zero. But what if I invested $3000 and they're now $100? I am then quite likely to just say "fuck it" and hold all the way to zero. Which, ironically, makes zero much less of a risk in option 2.

>>4696848
>Ponzi
Stop slinging that word around like it makes you sound intelligent. People on Biz know what a ponzi scheme is, and when you use it incorrectly, you sound like a TV news anchor trying to explain blockchain tech.

A ponzi scheme is one where existing members of the scheme are paid a dividend by the subscription fees of new enrollers. There is an inherent death cycle built into the model with a probability of 1, because there are a finite number of humans on plaent earth to enrol. Once you run out of new members, the previous wave of joiners get no dividend and leave. The next rung gets no dividend and leaves. And so on, up the chain.

Cryptos pay no dividend, so it is not a ponzi scheme. Your posts look brainlet as fuck when you use that word here.

[Anonymous No.4696931]

>>4696899
Old news. We do not care. We are making bank.

[Anonymous No.4697001]

>>4696894
Hey joe, Bitcoin Cash (BCH) also uses the same mining machines as Bitcoin (BTC), which is the largest proof-of-work pool in the world (combined with oldest chain=most secure cryptocoins).
Right now much of the electricity for these miners is all being wasted to make 1MB blocks for BTC (because it currently has a higher price), but these same machines, using the same amount of electricity, will produce 8MB blocks by mining BCH. Doing so results in faster transactions and cheaper fees for users. The switch to BCH is inevitable over time as 1MB blocks are already proving too small for today's level of Bitcoin users, so you chose wisely.

[Anonymous No.4697019]

>>4696918
Your argument is kindergarten tier. 10 trillion dollars is spent building a Kingdom. The ruler becomes a tyrant, and the people rise, overthrow him, and "airdrop" a new ruler. What is backed by which again?

[Anonymous No.4697029]

It's going to the moon Jerry

[Anonymous No.4697041]

>>4697019
Holy fuck. I have never seen a poster on here blown so totally the fuck out with so few words. Impressive

[Anonymous No.4697093]

>>4696680
>without shilling or hype
Lol, good luck, I see everyone picking sides already. But for real, expect downward movement after 1st of January due to Coinbase offering users the ability to withdraw their BCH. The price could hit even as low as $600. But after awhile when Bitcoin tops out and the experienced players think it is overpriced they may dabble with Bitcoin Cash due to its lower fees. If enough of these people switch over to BCH as their reserve crypto during the fall of Bitcoin Segwit it could reach parity. Will BCH recover after the Coinbase sales? Only if the developers offer everything BCH can. I don't know what will happen, but I'm keeping some of BCH and Bitcoin Segwit that way whichever wins I will win with it.

[Anonymous No.4697111]

>>4697019
>accuses post of being kindergarten tier
>makes a bad analogy about kingdoms and tyrants

Beyond the comedy of that, your point does not even address my original point.

My original post was that individual market participants *chose* to invest in Bitcoin. They put money into it. They then were *given* free BCH tokens. The vast majority of BCH holders therefore see their new holding as a bonus, a free gift. They attribute far less value on their BCH holdings than their bitcoin holdings - not least because the market rate is significantly lower.

The important factor here is that bitcoin attracts fiat currency (fwiw), whereas BCH attracts alt-flipping.

[Anonymous No.4697250]

also the bullshit talk aside, will bitcoin cash up back up to around 1700

[Anonymous No.4697270]

>>4697250
Lemme check the Oracle of Bithumb..

[Anonymous No.4697280]

>>4697111
BCH attracts fiat too (note 30d), and it isn't even listed for trade on many big exchanges yet.

[Anonymous No.4697305]

>>4696791
Brian Armstrong CEO of coinbase has been retweeting lots of pro BCH stuff for weeks you dumb cunt but sure you probably sold it August 2nd

[Anonymous No.4697316]

>>4697250
Within 3 days.

[Anonymous No.4697340]

>>4697250
Even if it goes back that high, it would only be for a brief time. It's heavily manipulated by whales. Those huge fake buy walls, lmao.

[Anonymous No.4697366]

>>4697111
Wat? Everyone I know flips alts with BTC, including me. I flip BTC and BCH and back. I follow the money. If The Rebellion is successful, I will side with them. If Lord Vader is successful, I will side with him. right now, the Rebellion looks quite a bit stronger, so I am vested with, and siding with them atm.

[Anonymous No.4697367]

A lot of people with a lot of money seem to hate BCH.

[Anonymous No.4697382]

>>4697340

ill be selling then.

[Anonymous No.4697383]

>>4697366
Dafuq? BCH just shot way up on Bittrex without Bithumb climbing first. It's Happening.

[Anonymous No.4697392]

what about the fact that most of the crypto has been linked to btc since the first big crash/dip. bch hass been locked at 0.132 btc for quite some time now. btc starts going up, bch goes up similarly and vice versa. both their charts look the fucking same.

[Anonymous No.4697394]

>>4697305
You can see from the 30day volume chart I just posted (viewable at http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/volume/monthly/)), any exchange operator would be plain stupid to deny themselves a slice of that much trade volume. It's one thing to have an opinion about a coin, it's another to cost your business hundreds of millions of dollars every month for that opinion. BCH adoption on more exchanges is inevitable.

[Anonymous No.4697794]

BCH going up WITH BTC. Is the damn coin locked in somehow? How can that make any sense at all?

[Anonymous No.4698121]

I heard it could go up a little more than $2k, what do y'all think?

[Anonymous No.4698277]

>>4698121
read this. its not going anywhere.. it will go to 2k when btc reaches 15-16k
>>4697794

[Anonymous No.4698314]

actually it will be going up to more than $8k in Jan

[Anonymous No.4698333]

I know, I will get a lot of hate, but shill me BCH in an argumentative way why it is superior to BTC. I am thinking about buying it.

Why would I buy it and why will it not drop lower again after being about x6 of what it was half a year ago?

[Anonymous No.4698396]

>>4698333
Obviously I'm not sure about it as an investment currently because I'm not sure if we're at a high or a low, as you can see in OP. But in terms of specifically how it is better than Bitcoin:

-Usable for what Bitcoin has been since it started, while Bitcoin currently is not.
-More scalable than BTC
-Not centralized and sabotaged
-Bitcoin's success, if you believe in it, will come because it is a form of revolution, not because its a new better paypal. BCH is this movement. BTC is a corrupted overvalued vision.
-BTC only serves as a store of value, and this is intentional at this stage. A store of value is only valid if it has a use, since otherwise the liquidity becomes nonexistent and circular, and is the definition of a bubble.

(I'm a long time BTC investor, who is beginning to dabble in trading. I've completely backed out of BTC not because I don't see profit from trading it, but because of the reason I'm here, which is the belief driving my initial investment)

[Anonymous No.4698401]

>>4698333
right now it's locked to btc i don't know why though. and if the rumors about btc going to drop to 8k or 7k are true then this along with all the other crypto in sync with btc will also drop.
as far as the benifits go, they are irrelevant today as crypto is not widely accepted anywhere and so far it is only good for increasing your moeny.

[Anonymous No.4698412]

>>4698333
see >>4697001

both are near identical systems that use the same mining hardware, but BTC is at the moment very wasteful for no user benefit (in fact punishing users).

The other simple reason is the same amount of money right now could buy you 1 BTC or 7.5 BCH, there's just much more potential gains for BCH.

[Anonymous No.4698454]

>>4698412
Yeah, but it also is like 1/7th of the price, so if you intend of not having your coins lying around for years to wait until they explode, it is not more profitable to pay your electric bills.

>>4698401
>>4698396

it probably is locked because of the ongoing war since they want to overthrow BTC and failed at it multiple times now. I also don't like morons like Roger Ver supporting BCH desu, this more of a red flag. it is safe to assume they only do it for speculative reasons to make more money from unassuming idiots, and not because of idealism. even though, the coin itself may prove superior. but so are lots of other altcoins.

[Anonymous No.4698685]

>>4698454
The primary reason Bitcoin has value right now is because the finite supply. This is the "store of value". I'd rather have 7.5 of something that has the same finite supply than 1, particularly when those 7.5 coins have technical and user advantages, and less fear of having my coins stalled up in a crowded mempool.

Consider the market cap differences and the required inflow to see gains also. $168B would be needed to double BTC, but only $23B to double BCH.

The altcoins you speak of do not have Bitcoin's legacy, or the hash rate that secures it. An interesting bit about being a fork too is that whales from BTC became whales in BCH automatically, so if the scales start to tip toward BCH favor, they have no reason not to support BCH, whereas an altcoin they'd have to take on risks of selling their BTC to consider buying into said alt. Many altcoins are tainted with presold coins, security concerns, adoption/regulation concerns etc that are not present with Bitcoin and by equiv Bitcoin Cash.

[Anonymous No.4698771]

>>4698685
Doesn't really work like that. The price is only partially because of "finite supply". Like everything it is supply and demand. If nobody ever has demand for a coin, nothing will ever change in the price.

So in order to make some money by investing (yes, otherwise nobody would buy now), you only care about growth potential.

[Anonymous No.4698827]

>>4698771
and the growth potential of BTC is the lowest of all coins out right now, as it is the most expensive and slowest.

[Anonymous No.4698888]

>>4698827
about x12 in 12 months is quite solid.

[Anonymous No.4698891]

>>4698685
i think it's safe to say 10x the people would invest in BTC over BCH given its popularity in the media, for the same reason people aren't investing in Myspace over Facebook.

[Anonymous No.4698912]

>>4698888
x6 in 4 months is solid for BCH.

Listen, you haven't responded to at least half my points, it's obvious you didn't come here to consider BCH but as some kind of BTC troll. Do what you want with your money.

[Anonymous No.4698934]

>>4698891
Those same people will be disappointed when the realize they can't do anything at all with the BTC they paid large $ for because transfer fees and tx times.

I had a friend that I got into Bitcoin months before the fork that made a newbie mistake of mistyping the fee, he waited 6 days for the transaction to process. It scared the shit out of him and he immediately switched to ETH. Now at least I could recommend BCH to him but I think he's alright with his ETH heh

[Anonymous No.4698949]

I’m long both btc AND bch

However BCH has jumped the gun: there’s insufficient demand from end users for currency class bitcoin instead of store of value class bitcoin. When that demand arrives, BTC could be forked again into a product better suited to it than BCH is … and BCH would have to die. BTC would survive - a reserve is always needed - but the wise anon would carefully dyor around the subject of demand

[Anonymous No.4698968]

>>4698949
If BTC would up their blocksize it would immediately kill BCH, they're just too stubborn to do it.

[Anonymous No.4698990]

>>4698968
No it wouldn't, that would be an admission of failure.

[Anonymous No.4699022]

>>4698990
admitting failure doesn't matter because it completely invalidates any advantage BCH would be able to claim, while benefiting BTC users at the same time.

[Anonymous No.4699028]

>>4696680
All I know is it needs to go up another $40 so I can get out of this stupid long.

[Anonymous No.4699029]

>>4698968
There's no demand for upping the blocksize. There's no demand for killing alts, either. Screaming weeaboo quintillionaires is not evidence of demand.

[Anonymous No.4699088]

>>4699029
>no demand for upping the blocksize
I think the existence of a $23B fork annihilates this claim. Besides, what's true now for BTC is not guaranteed to be true in the future, unless you have a REALLY sweet crystal ball that guarantees daily tx's stay below 350-380k from now until LN is fully avail (and your crystal ball can gaurantee that LN works well)

[Anonymous No.4699131]

>>4699022
And what advantage would Core have after their clear failure? A Lightning Network that they totally plan to get working within 2 years with no more delays? Bitcoin Cash already has their entire eco-system designed around large blocks with things like Graphene and Core has been adamant about keeping small blocks so they can sell their centralized side-chains.

They'd just anger all the small-blockers crying about bandwidth and storage-space while simultaneously proving that Wu and Ver were right. It would be suicide for them. It's funny because I honestly think at some point they'll be forced to raise the Block-size because of 100$+ fees and everyone will see how fucking retarded small blocks are.

[Anonymous No.4699145]

HOLY FUCK ITS LITERALLY MOONING

[Anonymous No.4699165]

>>4699088
>falling for the market cap meme
Market cap is number of coins * last price - the number has no other significance and is most certainly not evidence of demand.

Demand is from Mr Rajesh at the corner shop wanting to take a crypto at his point of sale; demand is from Mr Smithers wanting to pay off his Mr Simpson in crypto for the two weeks of labour Homer didn't do. Demand is not your employee saying "Hey! I can run your shop better" and setting up next door with few customers coming in the door.

These are still landrush days.

[Anonymous No.4699166]

>>4698934
Why use BCH when we have LTC with lower fees and faster transactions?

[Anonymous No.4699208]

>>4699131
What advantage does core have now? Users bought a lot of BTC so now the price is high. That is still there whether the blocks are 1MB, 8MB or 20MB

Note also that LN will work with other coins, including the potential to work with BCH. This is yet another reason why BTC doesn't make any sense as an investment, their actual plan for scaling could help their enemy too.

[Anonymous No.4699220]

>>4699166
LTC is 4x speed of BTC, BCH is 8x speed of BTC, BCH has a much bigger hash

[Anonymous No.4699249]

>>4699165
Right now BCH isn't even listed on all exchanges, yet you get the kind of 30day trade volume seen https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/volume/monthly/

Mr Rajesh won't be interested in transacting BTC when the fee is larger than the cost of the products. BCH will win all the Rajesh's of the world.

[Anonymous No.4699253]

>>4699166
>segwit no 0 conf
>inflation
>single dev
>1mb blocksize limit (can't scale)
If you're asking this question then you don't understand what fundamentally gives BCH its value

[Anonymous No.4699263]

0.139!!!! DRAGONSLAYER!!!!

[Anonymous No.4699342]

If I see BCH go up I also see BTC going up exactly the same way. The graphs are identical.

If the coin is locked like this and I am not just making some doumb mistake or misunderstanding this then this completely kills the fucking coin for me.

No only does it kill the coin for me it freaks me out, How the fucking how does one lock a coins value to another? The market manipulation we see daily is one thing but holy shit that's on another fucking level.

[Anonymous No.4699358]

>>4699249
That would be true if Mr Rajesh was looking today. He's not. He's several years away.

If there's new tech invented before then BCH could have its lunch stolen. You're right, BCH /could/ adopt that new tech too. But then BTC could adopt that exact same tech and steal BCHs lunch in exactly the same way.

[Anonymous No.4699380]

>>4699358
Except they aren't because onchain scaling kills their third layer money grab.

[Anonymous No.4699388]

>>4696791
This is fucking hilarious coming from a bcuckie. Bcore has no inherent value anymore, it cannot be used as a currency anymore, it's nothing but a store of molasses and it only has values because of fraudlent tether pumping. It is the #1 shitcoin.

[Anonymous No.4699411]

>>4696918
>The inherent value of bitcoin at the moment is its fiat investment. Because BCH was launched as an airdrop, it does not have the assurances of fiat backing.
>fiat backing
holy shit lmao get out of crypto quickly before you lose all you money you utter fucking brainlet

[Anonymous No.4699638]

>>4698949
Your post reads like it was written by someone who has no understanding of economics, someone who just watched a bunch of videos by that brainlet datadash on youtube.

There is nothing that makes bitcoin uniquely good as a store of value, there is absolutely nothing inherent to BTC that makes it better as a store of value than BCH for example

BTC is in a speculative bubble, and it will pop unless they are able to roll out LN within 6 months. If LN works ok youre good to go, it doesnt even matter if its a centralized turd with no censorship resistance, most BTC holders do not give a shit about crypto ideals anyways.

[Anonymous No.4699675]

>>4699638
Thanks for your input Mr Krugman

[Anonymous No.4699735]

>>4699675
Very ironic considering the fact that Bcore is the coin that is literally financially backed by federal reserve bankers.

[Anonymous No.4699761]

Reminder that vital33k doesn't think lightning networks are good enough.

Reminder that money skelly's brain is worth 80 times the combined cognitive power of blockstream.

Reminder that Lightning Network will never be both functional and decentralized. Pick 1.

[Anonymous No.4699768]

>>4699735
That sounds like a sell signal to me. Are you sure you know how to shill properly?

[Anonymous No.4699776]

>>4699342
thats the entire crypto market.

[Anonymous No.4699780]

>>4699342
Sia, BCH, BCG and BTC are all identical
Im literally over this bullshit you can never win, everythings tied to BTC. Might as well just buy BTC.

[Anonymous No.4699814]

>>4699780
funny enough it wasn't this similar before the crash/dip. bch was inversely related to btc. now its directly locked at 0.137

[Anonymous No.4699825]

>>4699768
If you want to bet on the banker kikes, buy BTC and Ripple, by all means.

[Anonymous No.4699846]

>>4699780
Uninformed Bcore brainlet. BTG is completely different with a different mining algortithm. Of course a simpleton like you doesn't understand why the mining algorithm is important.

[Anonymous No.4699880]

it's BCASH god damn it

[Anonymous No.4699882]

>>4699825
Or in case you prefer the chinese mining cartels and business kikes buy Bcash.

[Anonymous No.4699903]

>>4699882
>muh mining cartels
Literally zero evidence. Anyways if you're into miner conspiracy theories it should worry you that chinise mining pools have over 60% of the BTC hash power, so you're not really any better of with Bcore.

[Anonymous No.4699913]

who calls bitcoin bitcoin core?
roger, jihan, and sock puppets
who calls bitcoin cash bcash?
everyone except roger, jihan and sock puppets

[Anonymous No.4699922]

>>4699903
2major mining pools owned by 2 major bcash promoters...

[Anonymous No.4699936]

>>4699913
Go back to your censored shithole on reddit, corecuck.

>>4699922
Same mining pools also mine BTC, you fucking brainlet lmao

[Anonymous No.4699960]

>>4699936
i wonder why they are still mining bitcoin... oh wait they finally realised their fork is a worthless piece of shit shitcoin

[Anonymous No.4699996]

>>4699936
>what says Safety, Reliability, and Security?
>Oh I know! A girl with heavy make up to hide the cracks

[Anonymous No.4700017]

>>4699996
kek angry virgin

>>4699960
if you go to fork.lol you can see which coin is more profitable to mine, it switches back and forth all the time so all miners who arent brainlets mine whatever coin is the most profitable at any given moment.

[Anonymous No.4700044]

>>4696680
No adoption.
https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/transactions-btc-eth-bch-ltc.html#3m
Too many competitors. BCH isn't competing with BTC only, but also ETH.

Expect slow bleeding with intermittent pumps and dumps.

[Anonymous No.4700080]

>>4700017
wow your are retarded and condescending.
How is it that 2 major players in mining industry that publicly endorse (roger called bcash "my project") a coin and still allocate most of their ressource to mine their competitor? Why Ver is still holding lots and lots of bitcoin? Why are you trusting these ppl do you really think they have your best interest at heart? are you really that stupid?

[Anonymous No.4700120]

>on-chain scaling
>1GB block
>petabyte blockchain
>full node requires $1000 of external hard drive space
I like bcash too; but if the lightning network works it's ogre.

[Anonymous No.4700230]

>>4700080
whats wrong with calling bitcoin cash /our project/ ? ver is our lord and savior, we need people like him to defend the vision.
perhaps you are just worried that people realise bcore is under blockstream banksters sole control ?

[Anonymous No.4700244]

>>4700230
>>4700230
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=6V365_59-Lc
relevant information on blockstream & core

[Anonymous No.4700264]

>>4700230
god the state of /biz/ i actually can tell if you're trolling

[Anonymous No.4700307]

>>4700244
Such a boring voice, so much bollocks

[Anonymous No.4700325]

>>4700120
decentralization is just a tool for censorship free currency to exist.
we do not need everyone to run nodes to achieve open protocol for everyone.

[Anonymous No.4700349]

>>4700120
>muh memory cost
>>4700264
i dont give a fuck what you think about me.

[Anonymous No.4700368]

>>4700244
this

[Anonymous No.4700385]

>>4700120
>muh memory cost

[Anonymous No.4700667]

>>4700325
props on the pic

[Anonymous No.4700722]

>>4700325
The single valid argument against lightning is that it relies on people running hubs causing a form of centralization. Bch claims to fix that problem by bloating nodes but that causes more centralization as no one wants to run them. You get fees for running a lightning hub, nothing for running a node.

[Anonymous No.4700733]

https://medium.com/@whalecalls/fud-or-fact-blockstream-inc-is-the-main-force-behind-bitcoin-and-taken-over-160aed93c003

[Anonymous No.4700819]

>>4700722
What keeps a LN hub from creating more IOUs than the bitcoin it has on deposit?

[Anonymous No.4700860]

>>4696680
bcash is for faggots

[Anonymous No.4700981]

>>4700860
>be (((blockstream)))
>realize some uppity nip came up with a new form of gold
>dust off the old "how to take the goyim's shekels" textbook
>step 1: convince the goyim that gold is super valuable but hard to use in practice
>step 2: convince the goyim to give you their gold in exchange for IOUs for convenient transactions
>step 3: create more IOUs than the amount of gold you have, because the goyim won't cash out anyway
>step 4: profit off your fractional reserve bank
Literally. Every. Fucking. Time.

[Anonymous No.4700992]

>>4700819
If you think there's a bug there you can exploit it on litecoin today.
https://medium.com/litecoin-foundation/a-simple-guide-to-lightning-network-on-litecoin-bc944361a5fb

[Anonymous No.4701022]

>>4700722
bitnodes ran a program to incentivize full node operators until the end of 2015. what prevents
to utilise this model?

[Anonymous No.4701038]

>>4700722
bitnodes ran a program to incentivize full node operators until the end of 2015. what prevents
to utilize this model?

[Anonymous No.4701065]

>>4696823
Unregulated and anonymous method to complete financial transactions. Bitcoins, and all crypto have inherent value from this. And in this day and age, that value is nigh limitless imo.

[Anonymous No.4701179]

>>4701038
Relying on third parties to incentivize running core parts of your network doesn't seem very robust or reliable.

[Anonymous No.4701229]

>>4701179
So no Lightning Network then.

[Anonymous No.4701234]

>>4700992
You misunderstand my point; I'm not criticizing the software. I want to know what happens if I open a lightning network channel by borrowing 300 BTC from you, creating a channel with you for 300 BTC, and then giving you back your 300 BTC with some interest (which isn't much because I had it for a grand total of 10 minutes or 1 block confirmation). Now I have a 300 BTC channel but I don't have the 300 BTC required to back up the deposit.

[Anonymous No.4701288]

>>4696899
Bitcoin uses ECDSA, not RSA

[Anonymous No.4701308]

>>4701229
They are part of the system, the incentive to run them is already provided through fees. There's no need for a third party to pay people to run them.
>>4701234
I don't know but you can try it yourself now if you really want to find out.

[Anonymous No.4701605]

>>4701308
>try it yourself
It's on testnet in alpha.

>bug
It's not a "bug"; it's a "feature" and that's because the lightning network is really just a banking protocol for the underlying hard asset with the locked "balance" in the channel acting as deposits. All the crypto-bank has to do at this point is say "if you don't have enough to deposit, you can just open a free account with us and we'll open a "channel" for you. The catch is that the litecoins you get aren't even fucking real except at the crypto-bank you bank with, because they're crediting your lightning-network account with litecoin that never even had a channel opened for it, it's just payments within the hub itself. The actual legit LTC they have will go to settlements with other large crypto-banks rather than to any customers, because why the fuck do customers really need real LTC; they don't transact on-chain anyway.

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/5ybx32/how_the_lightning_network_could_ultimately/?st=jao1cgkt&sh=d18355c5

[Anonymous No.4701658]

>>4698396
>-More scalable than BTC
>-Not centralized and sabotaged

You've got to be kidding. BCH is literally a clone of BTC. In no way does that somehow make it "more scalable."

There are also more people who can engage in unilateral decision making for BCash than for Bitcoin. That's the definition of being more centralized, which BCash is. And if you disagree, answer this: Who is authorized to sign a NY-style agreement on behalf of Bitcoin?

I'll answer for you. Fucking nobody.

Give Roger his money back, you're doing a terrible job.

[Anonymous No.4701729]

>>4698685
>Consider the market cap differences and the required inflow to see gains also. $168B would be needed to double BTC, but only $23B to double BCH.

Marketcap doesn't tell you what you think it's telling you. It's just the last buy price x the number of coins. Doesn't say everything about the actual demand.

[Anonymous No.4701740]

>>4701658
>more people who can engage in unilateral decision-making for bcash
Who?

>NY-style agreement on behalf of BTC/BCH
What are you even trying to say?

>not addressing scalability at all
Either you want big blocks, you want the lightning network, or you want low transaction volume and high fees. Pick one.

[Anonymous No.4701759]

>>4698934

Is your friend an idiot? I sent Bitcoin the other day for a 3$ fee and it processed in 5 minutes.

[Anonymous No.4701795]

>>4701658
You are clearly a shill, nothing you've said has any meaningful content or contributes to the discussion.

Bigger blocks *do* make it more scalable. I personally don't believe that that makes it actually scalable as an absolute, but in the comparison with BTC, it is *more* scalable.

Rest of what you said is so apparently untrue that it doesn't need to be disputed by anyone.

Your implication that Roger is somehow doing this for money is ridiculous, given the fact that he's already made fortunes from Bitcoin, and that even since BCH branch, he's made more from his BTC than BCH, and it would not benefit him personally in any way, any more than it would benefit anyone who held BTC over the past years (since everyone received BCH when it forked). There's no logic behind the idea that Roger could somehow be orchestrating this as a scam, and the fact that shills even slightly attempt to use this as an argument against BCH is all the proof anyone should need that it's past time to escape from BTC, since it'll clearly be crashing down soon.

[Anonymous No.4702213]

>>4701795
>Your implication that Roger is somehow doing this for money is ridiculous, given the fact that he's already made fortunes from Bitcoin, and that even since BCH branch, he's made more from his BTC than BCH, and it would not benefit him personally in any way, any more than it would benefit anyone who held BTC over the past years (since everyone received BCH when it forked). There's no logic behind the idea that Roger could somehow be orchestrating this as a scam, and the fact that shills even slightly attempt to use this as an argument against BCH is all the proof anyone should need that it's past time to escape from BTC, since it'll clearly be crashing down soon.

Yes because an inevitably destroyed reputation is what prevented Madoff from running his own Ponzi Scheme.

Oh wait, sociopaths exist.

And already being rich prevents rich people from doing things to get richer

Oh wait, they do this literally all the time.

Pic related. It's the screeching child you apparently think is your hero.

[Anonymous No.4702272]

>>4702213
>your hero
Nobody has to like Roger Ver to realize that blockstream is attempting to implement a banking protocol in the exact opposite scheme of what Bitcoin is supposed to be.

>lightning network
>bigger blocks
Pick one and defend it instead of attacking Roger Ver, nobody likes bcash simply because Roger said so.

[Anonymous No.4702420]

>>4702272
Bigger blocks are definitely not a long term solution. Lightning may also have problems but at least it's trying to go in a direction that develops the tech and eventually allows "nano-transactions".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AecPrwqjbGw

[Anonymous No.4702478]

>>4702420
>and eventually allows "nano-transactions".
so does visa

[Anonymous No.4702561]

>>4702478
No it doesn't.

[Anonymous No.4703269]

>>4702420
>30 minute video
>says fucking nothing about why bigger blocks don't work
Fuck you for wasting my time.

[Anonymous No.4703272]

can anyone explain why bitcoin cash was made
is it an improvement on btc in any way?

was it made to address the problem of btc transactions taking forever to confirm?

[Anonymous No.4703506]

>>4703272
>>4703272
>>4703272
>taking forever to confirm
It has always taken 60 minutes, 6 blocks, for a transaction to be considered "confirmed".

>what's the difference
bcash allows about 8x the amount of transactions per block as btc, because the block size is 8MB instead of 1MB

>why does that matter
Because since there is more space on a block and more transactions can fit on it, the bcash network can handle more transactions at a lower fee than BTC.

>so why do people object to bcash
Because the solution is somewhat temporary in the sense that if in 2-3 years instead of 3 million people using crypto it's closer to 3 billion and they are doing 100x more transactions than they are now, that means the block size would need to be 100GB, and the blockchain would be petabytes of space.

First, this is an entirely speculative objection. Nobody "knows" 3 billion people will be using crypto in 2021. Second, there is literally nothing stopping anyone from just making a hundred shitcoin cash clones, which means now all of them can have 1GB blocks. Functionally this is exactly what the lightning network is, since "side-chains" are really the same as shitcoin blockchains.

>why do people hate the lightning network and segwit so much then
Because the lightning network does one thing that shitcoin clones don't - it gives tremendous ability for wealthy individuals to operate "hubs", which are really banks, and everyone now has to trust the hub with their BTC "on deposit". The lightning network is actually a banking protocol, and that's exactly what bitcoin is meant to get rid of.

[Anonymous No.4703611]

>>4696680
I'm really hyped from reading the recent roadmaps from the various teams.
Twice yearly scheduled hard forks.
Probably going to implement Graphene for crazy scaling (something Core is very unlikely to do since I think it requires a hard fork). This reduces bandwidth by something like 90%. It's an amazing invention
Talk of reducing block times to 1-2 minutes.

All the devs who've been kicked from Core are now working on Cash. This combined with the willingness to hard fork and add new features is gonna be amazing.

The real competition is Dash and Monero. And desu none have the community size or name branding of Bitcoin Cash. (I still hold them though)

sorry, I can't help myself from hyping

[Anonymous No.4703672]

>>4703269
Bigger blocks allow short term scaling while ignoring most of the problems bitcoin is facing. You can't implement hundreds of transactions per second per user by just having bigger blocks. Andreas if I remember correctly advocates for bigger blocks eventually but only as a part of a larger strategy of scaling. But it's not easy since it requires a hard fork and can't be done in a rush. Bch was forked by miners afraid of losing power, they are the biggest force undermining the mission of decentralization.

>>4703506
LTC is technically superior in every way to BCH and BTC as is. The only thing BTC has over other coins currently is worldwide trust and lots of miners so it's hard to become the majority miner. BCH undermines all this.
>trust the hub
The lightning guys claim there is no trust involved, if you can demonstrate in a clear way that coins can be stolen no one will want to use LN anymore.

[Anonymous No.4703774]

the last BTC dip it behaved just like any other dirty altcoin and went down too, so my guess is that it will stick around but the dream of slaying any dragons is over, it will have to win solely on getting traction as a currency

[Anonymous No.4703777]

the entire point of the blockchain is for transactions to be on the blockchain. Why would you pay for offchain transactions on the lightning network when you can just use dollar bills or a credit card for an offchain transaction?

Bitcoin cash will be the true fully functional bitcoin going all the way back to the genesis block once off-chain transactions get implemented in "18 months".

Also, r/bitcoin is a kiked-out shill fest with a controlled narrative on par with r/politics. If you can't see that, go spend your money on the tether-pumped scam coin that is BTC because that's how fucking retarded you are.

[Anonymous No.4703804]

It's gonna have a MAJOR CRASH, lots people will panic sell especially the newbies who bought at 10k. It's gonna be a bloodbad.

[Anonymous No.4703810]

>>4703672
>coins can be stolen
That's not the fucking point and you are intentionally disregarding the actual point - the LN makes it entirely possible for a "hub" to credit fraudulent LTC for its customers to transact with as long as its always in-hub. Since the transactions never go on-chain because they're in-hub, there is literally no way for the customer to know whether their LTC is real except by attempting a withdrawal, which is stupid because on-chain fees have been allowed to balloon (because the higher the on-chain fee is, the more likely a customer will use a hub rather than the on-chain network).

[Anonymous No.4703818]

Wabi wabi

[Anonymous No.4703955]

>>4703777
reddit is inherently shit.

>>4703810
As it was presented to me hubs don't have the information to do any of that, they just run the secure protocol and collect fees. The same applies, if you can clearly demonstrate that you can create fiat coins LN will fail or be patched.

[Anonymous No.4704005]

>>4696756

[Anonymous No.4704075]

>>4703955
>just run the secure protocol
You keep pretending like there is some magical property of the software that keeps people from being screwed in real life; how do you explain MtGox? Why didn't the magical software stop it?

[Anonymous No.4704208]

>>4704075
Wat? How was Mt. Gox a protocol issue? You deposited money into a third parties wallet like you do on any exchange trusting them with your funds. All exchanges could be inflating their coins right now, engaging in fractional reserve banking like you describe because there is no protocol securing them.

LN is supposed to be a secure protocol for transmitting transactions that none of the parties can exploit. If it doesn't actually do that it's completely worthless.

[Anonymous No.4704292]

>>4704208
>secure protocol for transmitting transactions
Bitcoin already was that.
>secure protocol for transmitting transactions for no fees by using a 3rd party clearing house for off-chain settlement
That's the LN.
>why ever even withdraw your funds from the 3rd party clearing house when it will cost you way more to do so and you'll have to come back to them to spend your funds anyway
Now its MtGox.

[Anonymous No.4704296]

Hey I've been out of the BTC loop for a couple years. Went to my Coinbase account and I see that I transferred 1.5 BTC back in 2014 to my wallet. I'm resyncing my Bitcoin Core wallet right now and it's been over 24 hours with it still syncing.

Currently it says I have 0.00 BTC in my wallet, but after the full resync something should show up, right?

[Anonymous No.4704338]

>>4704296
Technically once it resyncs past the day of the transaction you should see it. But I also have no idea what I’m talking about.

[Anonymous No.4704482]

>>4704292
>Bitcoin already was that.
Bitcoin is a secure decentralized public ledger. Do you need or even want all your transactions on that public ledger? Does it make any sense when we're talking about scaling all the way to nanotransactions?

LN supposedly is a p2p system for secure, anonymous, fast transactions where the links in the p2p chain don't know the details of your transactions but get fees for transmitting them. In a perfect world the links in the chain would be other users but experience in the real world shows discovering new nodes is a hassle so the peers who know about many other peers automatically become hubs of traffic. People will see this as an opportunity to make money off running dedicated hubs.

>3rd party clearing house
They say the channels automatically close, they are for transactions not storage.