King Shitcoin

[Anonymous No.7121751]

Can we all agree that this piece of fucking useless shit needs to fucking die already so that the crypto market can move forward?
>slow
>expensive
>no real world application
>muh "store of value"
Fuck off. Bitcoin is literally holding us back.

[Anonymous No.7121776]

>>7121751


I will agree if you post that fat bitcoin pic. I need to save it

[Anonymous No.7121794]

>>7121751
if bitcoin hits below 1000 all your alts will be worthless.

[Anonymous No.7121915]

its the crypto world reserve currency! END OF

btc got broke on purpose, so outside interests can come along, take control. once they have control, dont you think 'they' will want to keep it the crypto reserve currency?

[Anonymous No.7121963]

it would be worth it to get rid of that piece of shit once and for all, even if market goes to 0

[Anonymous No.7122147]

>>7121776
<3

[Anonymous No.7122175]

>>7121751
then
>we just need to get places to accept bitcoin.... look some tiny shop does.... look overstock.com does
now
>uh uh uh.... its virtual gold

just a con for idiots

[Anonymous No.7122194]

It's time to sacrifice this failed aged out shitcoin for the future of our glorious and diverse market.

[Anonymous No.7122237]

>>7122147


Thank you so much ! This pic makes me laugh like a retard

[Anonymous No.7122264]

>>7121751
>look mama i post it agen

[Anonymous No.7122274]

>>7121751 - gonna copy-paste my post @ >>7120411
Everyone wants a coin as a "working currency", buying coffees.

We get all this hype with instant transaction coins with zero fees, etc.

All I want is a coin that will work as a reliable store-of-value. You start to see the value in this once you have a respectably significant sum of money.

When you start getting calls from your bank for huge transactions due to AML alerts, and get required to provide "source of income" documents and have threats on your account being frozen.

When you read stories about billionaires getting their accounts frozen by the IRS (or whatever their country's taxman is).

Gold was great for this, but it's hard to buy, hard to store, hard to move and bring with you, hard to sell...

If a crypto reaches a marketcap enough to make it semi-stable (like gold's $8T), it's going to attract a LOT of big money for store-of-value purposes.

Otherwise, all your "fast and cheap" coins are going to stay forever volatile, jumping up and down by 25-50% in value in a day, and the big money is NOT going to STORE a huge portion of their net worth in that. They would only put in a small amount they would risk for speculation purposes.

[Anonymous No.7122288]

I hate grandpa.

[Anonymous No.7122327]

Brother it's tether, not bitcoin. Why would anyone put money into crypto when there is a real risk of the entire market collapsing to 1/10th it's size at any moment.

[Anonymous No.7122333]

>>7121915

[Anonymous No.7122639]

>>7122333
>>7122333
>>7122333
TRIPS

ah hes cute

but i guess you have been in this a year if not less so fuck off, like you know shit

[Anonymous No.7122770]

[Anonymous No.7122893]

>>7121963
Beneath the tether fud this is the main turbulence good desirable alts are trapped by btc/alt pairings

[Anonymous No.7123010]

>>7121751

LEL stay mad, shitcoiner.

[Anonymous No.7123053]

>>7122893

not for long

[Anonymous No.7123068]

>>7121751
You newcoiners are literal scum and the dumbest shitters I have ever seen.

Anyone who started to invest in crypto after 2015 never has any value to ever say.

I wish we could go back to the days of ethercuck and passive income memes.

[Anonymous No.7123128]

>>7123068
Literally every single person I've talked to about "bitcoin being shit" discovered crypto around the China fud crash, that's what planted the seed of Hate for them, seeing their shit coins plummet 60% in a day. Then the btc rally which crushed their alts even more... that's what made the seed sprout.
It's a fucking joke.

[Anonymous No.7123152]

>>7121751
Then get off your ass and start building alt-coin ATM's etc. Stop waiting for everyone else to do it for you. Crack a fucking book and learn how to code the way i've been doing for over a year. Fucking lazy millennials

[Anonymous No.7123185]

>Company after company dropping bitcoin and adopting bitcoin cash

Shant be long now

[Anonymous No.7123251]

>>7121751
There's a reason they say that Bitcoin Cash is the real Bitcoin.

[Anonymous No.7123281]

fuck yea oldfags

i also love getting free money when btc forks!

newfags STFU

[Anonymous No.7123303]

Any coins that takes BTC'splace will have the same problems as BTC, and you'll hate it for the same reasons. ETH almost had the issues because of a kitty game.

Let's be real, the only coins that could take it's place are ETH or XRP, if XRP does then the Jews have won again, and if ETH does, it will sway the altcoins even more then BTC does, since all the newest hottest shitcoins are all pre-mined shittokens that literally RUN ON ETH itself. If you think BTC ruins your portfolio when it moves, wait until ETH is on top and every other coin literally depends on ETH.


>>7123185
>>7123251

Lol, this irrelevant trash slips further down on the BTC pairing every week, if you want a flippening why not pick a coin that has a chance and isn't a Chinese scam?

[Anonymous No.7123342]

>>7123128
Most of /biz/ holds zero bitcoin in their portfolio, literally zero. Some don't even hold eth/xmr and all-in the shittiest of shitcoins. This generation is spoiled and has never seen a bear market. 90% of /biz/ would neck themselves in a real bear market.

[Anonymous No.7123351]

>>7123251
>>7123185
Bitcoin Cash will destroy Bitcoin!

[Anonymous No.7123433]

>>7123342
Yeah I've seen in blockfolio threads where anon with a decent portfolio gets attacked by $300 portfolio posters just because they hold btc.
Oh well, this is how we make money easily

[Anonymous No.7123464]

>>7123303
>Lol, this irrelevant trash slips further down on the BTC pairing every week, if you want a flippening why not pick a coin that has a chance and isn't a Chinese scam?

When bch flips bitcoin I'm going to laugh so hard at you retards

[Anonymous No.7123521]

>>7123464
Even the US gov't says Bitcoin Cash is the real Bitcoin.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/fork-fail-us-government-claims-bitcoin-cash-is-original-bitcoin

[Anonymous No.7123576]

>>7123521

Nope.

From: [e-mail]

"Thank you for your comments. You, along with many others, expressed concern on section 8.1.2. To help foster a full transparency approach on the editing of this section, I am sending the revised section to you for further comment.

8.1.2 Bitcoin Cash (BCH or BCC1) In 2017, Bitcoin users adopted an improvement proposal for Segregated Witness (known as SegWit, where transactions are split into two segments: transactional data, and signature data) through a soft fork. SegWit made it possible to store transactional data in a more efficient form. However, a group of users had different opinions on how Bitcoin should evolve – and developed a hard fork of the Bitcoin blockchain titled Bitcoin Cash. Rather than implementing the SegWit changes, the developers of Bitcoin Cash decided to increase the maximum blocksize (additionally the developers made changes to other aspects of the system, such as the difficulty adjustment algorithm). When the hard fork occurred, people had access to the same amount of coins on Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash.

1The ticker used for Bitcoin Cash differs depending on the exchange; some use BCH, some BCC."

Try again, btrasher.

[Anonymous No.7123586]

>>7123521
The article literally states that it's propaganda Lmao

[Anonymous No.7123688]

>>7123576
>>7123586

>Retards in denial.

[Anonymous No.7123736]

>>7121751
Agree
>>7121915
Its obsolete and dead. Ethereum is closing on it in marketcap and rising against it during every bear and bull. BTC is fucking finished. Get a fucking life.

[Anonymous No.7123770]

>>7121794
>if bitcoin hits below 1000 all your alts will be momentarily worthless.

FTFY Yes. Its wonderful. The flippening and the new bull. First bitcoin must die

[Anonymous No.7123820]

>>7123521
>Bitcoin Cash

dead dead dead. never will catch ethereum and will die with btc

[Anonymous No.7123853]

>Its obsolete and dead.

Sounds like you bought during last month's ATH and now you're just salty as fuck. Go back to plebbit and continue caressing Ver's balls, btrasher.

[Anonymous No.7123868]

>>7123736
newfag

[Anonymous No.7124011]

>>7123342
Not really, to some of us btc is the dominant cash crypto which is fine we just don't give a shit about cash cryptos period we view the furture as blockchain implementation cryptos.

[Anonymous No.7124020]

closer now then ever it seems and things are coming together for it to happen so most likely it will

[Anonymous No.7124127]

[Anonymous No.7124148]

>>7123853

COREKEKS ARE TERRIFIED

[Anonymous No.7124177]

>>7123868
>newfag

No oldfag. Just capable of seeing the change on the horizon. BTC transaction times and fees make it a curse. Its finished and useless. Lightning won't change that. The same avenues that let normies buy BTC for cash now let them buy ethereum instead. Its fucking dead. Its not digital gold, its the same as a collectors banknote from an outdated currency without the appeal and it is going to zero.

[Anonymous No.7124254]

>>7124177
you're right oldfag bitcoin has spent months shitting the bed its brand is severely damaged how is this in dispute the writing is on the wall

[Anonymous No.7124344]

>>7123433
I hate those retards. They’re the type of person that thinks if you’re down 50%, you only need to gain 50% to recover.

[Anonymous No.7124739]

>>7121751
Okay, so then what? Every other coin with a proven security model will have exactly the same problems under a high network load. Ethereum was crippled for days by a digital kittens app. Bitcoin cash will need to substantially increase the block size, and then its blockchain will quickly become enormous. Same thing with monero and others.

Proof of stake is fundamentally insecure. DAG barely works and its security and scalability are unproven. Everything else is vaporware.

[Anonymous No.7125105]

>>7124739
>quorum slicing is vaporware

LOL

[Anonymous No.7125180]

>>7121751
If bitcoin dies crypto will die with it.

[Anonymous No.7125267]

>>7121751
Unfortunately until other coins see mass adoption with their use cases bitcorn will remain king but once that happens all the wealth that's glutted up inside him will be dispersed into all the Alts which will be nice

[Anonymous No.7125328]

>>7121751
LN has launched. You too can lose your money using it as it's incomplete and unstable! Seriously, the devs are begging people not to use it. Last ditch effort by Blockstream to sell side chain solutions.

[Anonymous No.7125401]

>>7123068
>>7123128
>hello fellow oldfags

[Anonymous No.7125421]

>>7123185
>>7123251
These

[Anonymous No.7125424]

>it'll recover, it always has
>35k eoy
What if I told you BTC will never hit 15k again

[Anonymous No.7125433]

>>7125180
It won't die, it will just slowly fade away.

[Anonymous No.7125462]

>>7125433
Then so does crypto.

[Anonymous No.7125487]

>>7122274
There is no reason at all there must be a correlation between an enormous market cap and artificially restricted idiotic technical decisions in the blockchain which is the medium for the token in question. In fact, the contrary is true; no token with a chain crippled by sabotage will ever accomplish or maintain the necessary trillion plus market cap to be suitable as a long term stable store of value competitive with gold.
People are stupid. But they're not that stupid.

[Anonymous No.7125519]

>>7125180
Most of crypto is destined to die. There will only be one successor, and it'll keep slowly creeping up while BTC fades into oblivion and the rest die off. There's too much wrong with BTC, it needs to be replaced

[Anonymous No.7125565]

>>7125519
>it needs to be replaced
No you just want it.

[Anonymous No.7125571]

>>7123251
>literally everything going down with bitcoin
>BCash is 1/3 the price it was during the Coinbase drama
>"I told you guys BCash is the real deal!!"

[Anonymous No.7125575]

>>7121751

Just transferred 1.3 btc to atm wallet

Took $4 and less than 10 minutes

Yes I am hodling and no I am not cashing out

Have fun with your "alt" coins

[Anonymous No.7125615]

The real reason why Cashies are delusional isn't what they claim about their imitation coin. It's that they don't realize crypto will never be accepted as real currency in the state it is right now, no matter how good it is technologically.

[Anonymous No.7125660]

>>7121751
Yeah blah blah blah sure it makes sense. This shit isn't gonna catch on until at least 2019. Bitcoin is going to peak again. 36,000 I've seen it in my fucking dreams.

[Anonymous No.7125664]

>>7121751
Even normies know that buttcoin is garbage, just the deluded maximalists that cling to this dying shitcoin.

[Anonymous No.7125673]

>>7124739
Bullshit. Proof of work as a security model has absolutely fucking nothing to do with an artificially restricted block size. Why the fuck are people confused by this shit constantly?

[Anonymous No.7125692]

>>7125615
This is true. Idk if any of the DAG coins could scale to 7 billion instantly, would be interesting though

[Anonymous No.7125722]

>no real world application

you're kidding right?

[Anonymous No.7125726]

>>7125565
Everyone should want it. BTC is being dropped as a currency because it's slow and the fees make practical transactions cost prohibitive. And crypto was never meant to be a store of value, "gold 2.0" makes no sense. The whole point of cryptocurrency is having something that replaces cash

[Anonymous No.7125778]

>>7121751
I fucking hate this stupid shitcoin. Every normie that talks about crypto thinks that if I invest into cryptos I am buying Bitcoin. Fucking die already you piece of shit!

[Anonymous No.7125779]

>>7125673
Capped blocksize means Less on chain transactions mean less fee revenue which means less miners which means lower hashpower which means lower security

[Anonymous No.7125780]

>>7121751
Nah... Bitcoin serves a purpose,a retarded purpose, but a purpose non the less.

What we need is some sort of decentralized tether, 1-1 to usd and get rid of the super retarded eth and btc / everything else pairings.
That's what needs to die.

[Anonymous No.7125782]

>>7125726
>The whole point of cryptocurrency is having something that replaces cash
That isn't happening for years.

[Anonymous No.7125815]

>>7125780
Decentralized FIAT and gold is coming. Check out Jibrel Network, that shit will be huge after this Tether bullshit.

[Anonymous No.7125875]

>>7125782

It was already becoming a thing before bitcoin shit the bed. You could buy all sorts of shit with bitcoin

[Anonymous No.7125883]

>>7121751
instead of being a whiney faggot why don't you propose an idea of how to kill lynch this shitcoin without tanking the rest of the market. Threads like this are pathetic either encourage some intelligent thought or fuck off loser.

[Anonymous No.7125884]

>>7124148

Terrified of ETH maybe, not one is scared by Rogers pet coin lmao

[Anonymous No.7125900]

>>7121751
I agree, especially on the technical basis.

[Anonymous No.7125901]

>>7125780
>some sort of decentralized tether

Whoever invents and popularizes the blockchain decentralized central bank (lol) will win everything.

[Anonymous No.7125902]

>>7125782
Between precious metals and crypto i am already completelty immune to central banks inflation. Adoption of bitcoin cash will start this year and then very quickly speculation will have little impact on price tied to real economic activity

[Anonymous No.7125910]

>>7125779
... This sounds like you're trying to contradict me, but you're actually repeating and emphasising the point. More on chain throughput provides higher economic incentives for the provision of hashing power thus improving, rather than compromising, the security model of an actually functional vs sabotaged and artificially restricted chain.

[Anonymous No.7125929]

>>7125815
I have seen.

Thanks anon.

[Anonymous No.7125933]

>>7121751
BTC will die one day but I guarantee you when it happens the market will tank so hard there will only be pink wojak in the catalog

[Anonymous No.7125934]

>>7125901

>blockchain decentralized central bank (lol) will win everything

So, BTC + LN?

[Anonymous No.7125952]

>>7125910
Yeah. I misread your comment as saying there is no relation between security and blocksize

[Anonymous No.7125959]

>>7125726
No lmao, gold 2.0 SoV is the entire value proposition. No one wants to use a fucking slow database to make payments. Venezuela... Zinbabawe, India getting rid of rupee, Greek debt crisis... All of this shit made Bitcoin moon. The 21 million supply is one of it's most important aspects. The main reason bcash will fail is because it's value proposition is not gold, BTC can go to $20 trillion as a store of value

[Anonymous No.7125966]

>>7125487
If bitcoin fails as a store-of-value, crypto will NEVER even be thought of as a safe store-of-value by the big money EVER AGAIN.

As that proves that no matter how good your coin is, it can eventually be rendered "obsolete".

Just look at how Polo was once the big place to be. Then it became Bittrex because Polo was laggy. Then it became Binance because trex was closed. Now it's Kucoin because Binance rips off users with withdrawal fees and untradeable decimals.

It'll prove that no matter how good the coin's tech is, the "next big thing" will overtake it, so it's not ever reliable as a store-of-value.

If that happens, all crypto will ever be is a speculation market, until the bubble pops.

[Anonymous No.7125986]

so why is it crashing this time?

[Anonymous No.7126003]

>>7125986
le tether fud

[Anonymous No.7126047]

>>7126003
>giving a shit about that irrelevant trash
this market is pathetic if some shitcoin can crash the entire market

[Anonymous No.7126067]

>>7125726
> "gold 2.0" makes no sense

To me, it's ALL I want from crypto. I don't care if it takes 1-2 days to transfer, I don't care if it never moons with x10 or x100 gains, so long as it doesn't crash either.

All I want is an uncensorable store-of-value

I'd hate to repeat myself to explain why, so just read my post above: >>7122274

[Anonymous No.7126083]

>>7125966
Nothing ever needed to overtake BTC though. Development and scaling were blocked...

[Anonymous No.7126089]

>>7125986
Very well timed news from msm

[Anonymous No.7126090]

>>7125966
"Because x would prove you must actually pay attention to and manage the value of your investments in the space, x also proves that the space has no value." is effectively what you just said boils down to. If investments genuinely require the holders just being able to blindly throw money of them completely ignorant of the massive flaws in their architecture that anyone with the slightest inkling of a few neurons to rub together would be able to perceive, then investment itself is a valueless pursuit and we should all just go back to obeying the nearest complete psychopath that threatens to kill anyone that contradicts his idiotic fever dreams.

[Anonymous No.7126139]

>>7125575
glad to hear because bitcoin has literally shit the bed for months horrible wait times transaction fee shock have sent waves of newfags to ethereum, the writing is on the wall

[Anonymous No.7126156]

>>7126090
Gold is a pretty brainless investment.
As are index funds.
Hence the huge success and adoption of both as "stores-of-value".

Otherwise it's all a speculation market, NOT a store-of-value. Putting your net worth into it would be equivalent to buying up penny stocks with all your money. Big money would never do it.

So it can never become a store-of-value if that happens, just like I said.

[Anonymous No.7126185]

I imagine the world of cryptos to be some unstable shithole like the middle east or Africa. Bitcoin right now is (or at least was) king shit by default. He was the first great warlord or dictador but his power is weaning. He will be replaced but the succession won't be painless... we'll see months or maybe years of bear market as tonnes of coins switch into the store of value role.

My prediction? The winner of this ultimate battle of ultimate destiny will be Monero... in a blood- stained sweater.

[Anonymous No.7126188]

>>7122264
>look mama i dun posted thumbnail

[Anonymous No.7126208]

>>7121751
Because if Bitcoin can be replaced, so can your favorite coin that you spent tens of thousands of dollars on

[Anonymous No.7126226]

>>7126067
Agree with everything you say.

>>7123251
>$,1447
Kek

[Anonymous No.7126299]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFBbOHohwR8

[Anonymous No.7126302]

>>7126083
I am guessing this is an argument towards increasing the block size?

I personally want them to increase it, but I am NOT an advocate of forks.

Also, I agree with them that blocksize increase cannot scale globally.

Imagine global scaling: everything is a transaction, even a parent giving their kid their daily allowance. Or people chipping in to pay a bill when eating out, each person will make a transaction. Also online use cases, like each ad view/click could be paid as a crypto transaction, or each tip a streamer/camgirl receives could be a transaction.

It's going to be billions of transactions per day.

It CANNOT be all saved on-chain.

Only an off-chain solution would be scalable enough to work globally.

I'm hoping Lightning can do it, but either way, I just want an uncensorable store-of-value. You guys can enjoy your "fast/free" transactions, I don't really have any desire for that.

[Anonymous No.7126316]

>>7126156
Gold is a natural token not subject to artificial supply tampering and thus ideal for the management of scarcity that has thousands of years of proven actual working history, in fact the economic system untied from that basis is not even a half century old. It is as far from brainless as you could possibly get,
Except perhaps for index funds, which are by definition an automatic market lambda function aggregate of the sum total result of all market intelligence at any given time.
Those two examples are near enough to the exact opposite of the "lol dunno its like a digital token rite so I can store all muh value in it forever safe as hell no problem and I don't need to actually understand how it works or how it's implemented or any of the actual concrete technical details about it at all and if the screaming hordes of people pointing out what sound kinda like fatal flaws in this particular system that only apply to this particular system turn out to be right all digital tokens forever should also be considered worthless. "
That's fucking retarded.

[Anonymous No.7126363]

The thing cant compete with what the Visa network can do. That alone needs to be addressed if you want a truly viable global candidate. If it is meant to solely be a value store, fine. But this is not how I envision what the future should be. do you? We need an ultra fast, decentralized system. That will win.

[Anonymous No.7126384]

>>7123770
>momentarily

[Anonymous No.7126477]

>>7123770
>First Bitcoin must die
We've been raising it like a pig for slaughter

[Anonymous No.7126478]

>>7121751
bitcoin is the only coin that matters you filthy disgusting shitcoiner

[Anonymous No.7126498]

>>7126302
>but I am NOT an advocate of forks
Why? Forks are just protocol updates, they don't mean chain splits. XMR forks all the time and BCH just did one like a month ago.

Larger blocks can facilitate global commerce. Something requiring millions of transactions a day like say a derivatives market can be done with LN/payment channels which already exist on both chains (not to be confused with lvl3 LN).

[Anonymous No.7126515]

>>7126478
No. https://freedom.social/register.aspx is the coin we need.

[Anonymous No.7126531]

>>7126363
https://cpgblogger.blogspot.co.at/2016/04/how-to-scale-bitcoin-to-visa-levels.html?m=1

Here is how to do it without hard fork

>Inb4 bcash reply with a medium post about how lightning network can't be decentralized and something about blockstream ADA core Roger was right
I will not respond the bcash retards

[Anonymous No.7126536]

>>7126316
Rant about gold's history, gold is not brainless

Still, you can be pretty brainless just buying gold and hoarding it, and reliably store your value that way.

Don't have to understand how something works to use it.

The internet is a pretty complex architecture, but people don't have to know or understand the layers of networking, ethernet, TCP/IP, HTTP, etc. just to brainlessly use Facebook on their mobile phone.

> he screaming hordes of people pointing out what sound kinda like fatal flaws in this particular system that only apply to this particular system turn out to be right all digital tokens forever should also be considered worthless.

No. >>7126208 put it better than I can, it proves that:

> Because if Bitcoin can be replaced, so can your favorite coin that you spent tens of thousands of dollars on

[Anonymous No.7126638]

>>7126498
Sorry, I should've said I am not an advocate of forking into another coin/network.

As I said, I don't oppose larger blocks, but I do think hard forks should be done VERY carefully.

A fiasco like Ethereum/ETC happening to bitcoin right now could kill the entire project. So I understand them being VERY careful with it.

But I believe they do have to increase the block size eventually.

But for global scaling, I believe only an off-chain solution like Lightning can achieve it.

[Anonymous No.7126647]

>>7126478
>MUH BITCOIN

[Anonymous No.7126700]

>>7126316
>Rant about gold's history, gold is not brainless

Still, you can be pretty brainless just buying gold and hoarding it, and reliably store your value that way.

Don't have to understand how something works to use it.

The internet is a pretty complex architecture, but people don't have to know or understand the layers of networking, ethernet, TCP/IP, HTTP, etc. just to brainlessly use Facebook on their mobile phone.

> the screaming hordes of people pointing out what sound kinda like fatal flaws in this particular system that only apply to this particular system turn out to be right all digital tokens forever should also be considered worthless.

No. >>7126208 put it better than I can, it proves that:

> Because if Bitcoin can be replaced, so can your favorite coin that you spent tens of thousands of dollars on

[Anonymous No.7126732]

>>7126536
You can be relatively brainless about gold *because* it has thousands of years of empirical validation behind it. And even that breaks down in the modern world given things like the massive manipulation of the price of gold by mass paper trading to keep it suppressed.
Saying "if x can be replaced all things which match x in the sense of arbitrary definition y can also be replaced." simply proves either nothing if the definition of y is limited to a sufficiently narrow one where it actually means something valid (digital tokens which have been hijacked and sabotaged to make them functionally worthless in a multi year world spanning attack) or too much as the definition is expanded from there (digital tokens period? Well there goes the entire modern monetary system period because that's everything. Cryptocurrencies in general? Why should the failure of one particular chain that fell to one particular attack at enormous expense to the attacker have any bearing at all on the other chains that are completely unaffected by it and in fact stand to benefit from it?)

[Anonymous No.7126823]

>>7126638
LN is live right now, use it if you like. It's completely unstable and people are losing money, but you can use it.

ETC/ETH forked because the DAO. Eh, that's a whole other can of worms though.

I don't think Core will be rising block size anytime soon. For Segwit-LN to work (it doesnt anyways) and Blockstreams business model to play out, blocks need to be full.

[Anonymous No.7126916]

>>7126823
>It's completely unstable and people are losing money,
It's been on the market for like 2 weeks lol


>I don't think Core will be rising block size anytime soon.
Core doesn't decide, it's the users. There is a reason BTC price went to the moon after segwit, and then 2x failed. The users have been decided to use the real Bitcoin.

Enjoy bcash for the next few months

[Anonymous No.7127001]

>>7126732
What you don't seem to understand is all the infrastructure built around bitcoin right now.

Most of the USD liquidity in exchanges is in bitcoin.

Many exchanges in other countries only operate on bitcoin.

The most available crypto ATM are bitcoin ATMs.

The most liquid trading pairs on exchanges are bitcoin pairs.

If all of that could actually come crashing down to zero, everyone would see that building such infrastructure around other coins is a HUGE RISK, as it CAN happen despite how big and established a coin is.

AND many people will think crypto really does have no value (as most pro-fiat people argue), because even the largest one could crash to zero.

But I understand you'll never accept this argument, since all you are arguing is that "it CAN be replaced", and really, there's no way I can prove that it can or can't since it's never happened before, this is uncharted territory.

[Anonymous No.7127081]

>>7126916
The fact they are developing on Mainnet should be a massive red flag.

Rising block sizes requires consensus from the miners. They won't get it, because that fork already occurred and also doesn't have Segwit.

[Anonymous No.7127087]

>>7127001
It can't come crashing down to zero, because the actual bitcoin that miners all along have signalled for and supported remains in existence and is completely unaffected by the sabotage on the core/legacy chain. And that's exactly what is happening with so many of those services dumping the sabotaged version to adopt the working one as it becomes clearer what actually happened to even the slower market participants as time goes on. The only thing going to zero is the sabotaged product.

[Anonymous No.7127119]

If this does now, then the whole crypto scene will die with it. It needs to die from natural causes. With time it will go away. Just have patience

[Anonymous No.7127134]

>>7126823
>For Segwit-LN to work (it doesnt anyways)

If it can't work, crypto is doomed as a global currency.

I don't believe on-chain scaling can ever achieve that (no, not even the instant/free DAG coins like Raiblocks or IOTA).

You're gonna end up saving billions of transactions permanently in a blockchain/tangle/block-lattice, does not seem sustainable.

In that case, this is all a speculation market until the bubble pops. Or maybe gold 2.0 can work, I have no idea.

[Anonymous No.7127182]

>>7127001
This entire space is uncharted territory. Bitcoin can be replaced and it will because Core is incompetent. ETH will overtake it this year and BCH will over take it by EOY.

[Anonymous No.7127289]

>>7127087
If you are referring to everything shifting to BCH, sure miners can, but all of the infrastructure built around it can't instantly do that.

Not even the USD liquidity exists.

If anything will flip BTC, it's ETH. I don't even see BCH in that running, sorry.

SHA-256 miners will end up with massive farms of paperweights if that happens.

[Anonymous No.7127319]

>>7127182
If ETH overtakes BTC, I don't see any reason for BCH to even get back into the scene anymore.

In fact, having bitcoin in it's brand might be a BAD thing, everyone will remember it as being related to the coin that went from $19k to zero.

Meanwhile, ETH has the EEA, with Microsoft, Intel, JP Morgan, Accenture, etc.

ETH will stay king if it dethrones BTC.

[Anonymous No.7127486]

>>7127289
The difference between changing software coded for original btc to work with bch vs even changing it to use segwit is heavily in favour of BCH. That matters a lot to the implementations, and thus the cost, and thus the rate at which this will happen. ETH by contrast is a completely different cosebase altogether with completely different underlying economic attributes and issuance rates etc etc etc.
I like and hold ETH and think it's good for what it was intended to be, a platform for smart contracts. That's not however what Bitcoin was intended to be, and that vision lives on in BCH, not ETH.

[Anonymous No.7127544]

>>7127319
ETH isn't going to scale, BCH is. Even if you don't believe doing so is feasible. Partnerships aren't as meaningful as you think when it comes to decentralized crypto, it's mostly just hype shilling.

You have a point about brand, however as people adopt and learn what exactly it was that caused bitcoin to fail (Blockstream) they won't associate that with BCH.

[Anonymous No.7127705]

>>7125901

>some sort of decentralized tether

I thought about it and I think it would be retarded to have a decentralized tether to usd... No way.

It should be equivalent to a sort of "basket" like 1 ounce of gold + 1 metric ton of steel + 1 barrel of oil + 1 ton of wheat, etcetera... Whatever constitutes the foundation (commodity wise) of modern society.
Or a simple basket of fiat, like 1 crypto = 30%usd + 25%euro +30%cny...

The contents and weight of the basket would be determined by consensus and yada yada yada...

[Anonymous No.7127863]

>>7123128
I've come to this conclusion too. BTCs market dominance is down and everyone is hodling they're fotm alts and blaming btc for them no experiencing 30% growth a day.

They also don't atleast appreciate that btc is the most secure and battle tested coin with the largest and most passionate community.

It's not like you give a shit about any of your alts. You just want to sell them. But at least some in the btc world genuinely care about financial revolution.

[Anonymous No.7127898]

>>7127486
The codebase argument only applies to other exotic coins like Raiblocks or IOTA.

Otherwise, ETH is so widely adopted that most exchanges and infrastructure already have systems in place for ETH, and can even add any ERC20 token instantly.

I can't really see a reason BCH will come out on top of ETH, as the USD liquidity is not there. And ETH has more advanced technology (it can even implement Lightning as Raiden), where as BCH doesn't even have Segwit, which will make implementing Lightning a massive hurdle.

And I don't believe global scaling can be achieved without off-chain solutions (which I've discussed in my posts above), so I think if ETH comes out on top, nothing will ever dethrone it.

[Anonymous No.7127943]

>>7127544
cashies are actually this deluded

[Anonymous No.7127967]

>>7127898

i have similar thoughts anon.

[Anonymous No.7127968]

>>7127898
Segwit is the primary reason Cash forked off. Removing signatures from transactions is a flaw, not a feature.

[Anonymous No.7128010]

>>7127544
I believe the only proper solution to global scaling is off-chain (billions of transactions per day can't be feasibly stored permanently onto a blockchain).

And ETH can scale better than BCH. It already has dynamic blocksize, and it can implement Lightning via Raiden.

Meanwhile, BCH doesn't even have Segwit, so implementing Lightning would be a massive hurdle.

[Anonymous No.7128066]

>>7127968
I really don't see any reason it's a problem, other than it also removes ASICBoost.

On the other hand, transaction malleability is a huge problem if you're going to implement Lightning.

[Anonymous No.7128201]

>>7128066
ASICBoost makes mining more efficient, less power consumption, etc. Now the patent fuckery you have a point. Removing digital signatures and putting transactions into anyone can spend addresses is a massive security risk.

BCH is never going to implement cross channel lightning, so that's a non issue. Again lvl3 LN doesn't work and that was the whole sales pitch of Segwit.

[Anonymous No.7128252]

>>7121794
seriously why can no one see this

[Anonymous No.7128275]

>>7128201
> ASICBoost makes mining more efficient, less power consumption, etc
And yet not everyone has access to it.

> anyone can spend addresses is a massive security risk
Segwit has been active for quite a while now, have you seen anyone complaining about it so far?

I invite you to try and attack it yourself if you think it is so vulnerable.

> lvl3 LN doesn't work
If Lightning doesn't work, then crypto is doomed IMO. There is no way on-chain scaling will ever be able to accomodate global adoption.

If that is not the case, then this is all a massive speculation market until the bubble pops.

[Anonymous No.7128290]

>>7123251
literally about to get flipped by ethereum
are you even watching the whale signals??? Theyre about to flip ETH over BCH

[Anonymous No.7128316]

Yep

[Anonymous No.7128365]

>>7128275
BCH will scale on chain and utilize LN where needed.

PoW is designed for mining competition. Bitmain does have a massive advantage as of right now. Mining across the board needs more competition, with GPU mining this is even more true.

[Anonymous No.7128477]

>>7128365
Sigh, I feel like I've repeatedly answered the same arguments over and over again towards BCH in this thread, so you guys enjoy your BCH.

Have fun.

[Anonymous No.7128564]

>>7128477

Your reasoning was kinda shit

[Anonymous No.7128572]

>>7128275
>If Lightning doesn't work, then crypto is doomed IMO. There is no way on-chain scaling will ever be able to accomodate global adoption.
There is a massive yawning chasm between 14kbps and global adoption. Core sabotage is convincing otherwise intelligent people like yourself to ignore that chasm. You should stop ignoring it.

[Anonymous No.7128695]

>>7128290
??? Bcash was never bigger than Eth

[Anonymous No.7128829]

>>7128564
Nah, just too much for your 2-digit IQ to comprehend.

[Anonymous No.7128966]

>>7128829

>le ur dum

corecucks never surprise

[Anonymous No.7129115]

>>7122237
>>7122147
My OC :D

[Anonymous No.7129126]

>>7128966
It is true though, I've posted well-thought out arguments backed with technical details and logic.

All you've posted are memepics, "retards", "shit", and "corekeks", and "corecucks".

Nice arguments.

[Anonymous No.7129185]

>>7129126
Your well thought out arguments backed with technical details boil down to "technical details don't matter". That's... not actually logical, and the way in which it references technical details is probably not something you should be proud of.

[Anonymous No.7129238]

>>7129126
>I've posted well-thought out arguments backed with technical details and logic.
>Well-thought out
Shitposting
>Technical details
Your personal opinions
>Logic
Baseless claims

[Anonymous No.7129360]

>>7129185
I don't see what you are having issue with, I responded to all your concerns.

On the other hand, you were defending gold and index funds as being better stores-of-value than crypto.... which is true, but I was saying that is a hopeful future use case of bitcoin/crypto. But it seems you value transaction speed more.

Different priorities, I don't see what the issue is with that.

I want an uncensorable store-of-value, you want digital cash.

And I believe that the top crypto going to zero will forever harm crypto's chances of being a store-of-value, you don't.

Then let's just agree to disagree with that.

[Anonymous No.7129366]

[Anonymous No.7129379]

>>7129238
> Shitposting

LOL. Look who's talking
Nice self portrait btw

[Anonymous No.7129499]

>>7129360
> I don't see what you are having issue with, I responded to all your concerns.
My core concern, pun intended, is that Bitcoin is a shit product, as it has been sabotaged, and this actually matters. Your response has been "The sabotage was maybe necessary, and the technical details that allow one to distinguish between sabotage and advancement need to not matter, because if they do, all crypto is doomed anyway, in fact, if I'm wrong in in any way, all crypto is doomed." In fact you sound familiar, Greg? Is that you?

>On the other hand, you were defending gold and index funds as being better stores-of-value than crypto.... which is true,
I never said that, all I said was that they were both far from brainless. I do think they're better stores of value than sabotaged Bitcoin, but not better stores of value than actual genuine cryptocurrencies not so sabotaged.

> But it seems you value transaction speed more.
It's simply not either/or. The medium of exchange use case is necessary for the store of value use case, a better medium of exchange use case concurrently increases the degree of the store of value use case. That you think you need to choose them is because that is the narrative which the core saboteurs have imposed upon the space. It's wrong.
Basically that's the problem with your line of argumentation, everything you rest it upon is wrong, but you think saying "if I'm wrong then everything is doomed anyway so it doesn't matter" is some kind of rebuttal to that. It's not, it just means that you and the people who hold your position are the ones that are going to end up screwed when the inevitable finally happens.

[Anonymous No.7129624]

>>7126089
I don't understand.
How can the US subpoena Tether, when Tether is based in the British Virgin Islands?
https://tether.to/legal/
>Governing Law: These Terms of Service shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the British Virgin Islands, and shall be interpreted in all respects as a British Virgin Islands contract. Any claim or action arising from or related to these Terms of Service shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the British Virgin Islands. For the avoidance of doubt, and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, this provision expressly applies to any tort claim against Tether. The venue and forum for any claim or action against or involving Tether shall be in the British Virgin Islands. You unconditionally attorn to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the British Virgin Islands and all courts competent to hear appeals therefrom. You also unconditionally agree to the exclusive forum and venue of the British Virgin Islands in all claims or actions arising from or any dispute or question of any kind relating to these Terms of Service. The doctrine of forum non conveniens shall not apply in the selection of forum under these Terms of Service.

[Anonymous No.7129631]

>>7129366
kys

>>7129360
>I want an uncensorable store-of-value, you want digital cash.
bitcoin does this

>>7127968
mostly politics. the entire 2 year scaling debate led up to this. NYA, BIP148, UASF, 2x, bitcoin ulmited, bitcoin xt, bitcoin classic. 2 yrs of politics led up to that moment august 1st, and then after bip91 passed bitcoin cash was forked and both parties tried to scale differently. i don't think segwit was the main issue at all when it came to bch, mostly jihan and other miners vs developers

[Anonymous No.7129735]

>>7129499
I'm not sure if you were the one I responded to, but as I said, I am not opposed to a blocksize increase.

BUT I am opposed to a careless hardfork, as having an ETH/ETC fork scenario in bitcoin right now will most likely destroy the project.

I don't see any intentional sabotage, I just see that achieving consensus for something like a hard fork is extremely hard.

I personally believe that we should let the market decide (as consensus via methods like "miner signaling" is susceptible to Sybil attacks).

If people think bitcoin should go away, they can dump it into oblivion and pump whatever coin they think should be king.

I don't see anyone pumping BCash though.

> all I said was that they were both far from brainless
They're the most brainless in that you can buy them and forget them

> not better stores of value than actual genuine cryptocurrencies not so sabotaged.

To me, they're all shit stores-of-value. Even bitcoin.

To become a good store-of-value, the marketcap must increase to levels that whales cannot manipulate it easily (like gold's $8T). That's all that matters imo.

And right now, bitcoin is the closest to achieving that.

> It's simply not either/or

I agree.

But I see separate solutions for them.

For store-of-value, achieving a high marketcap is necessary.

For scaling to become digital cash, I believe off-chain is the only solution to global adoption. Block size increase WILL be necessary, but you can't store billions of transactions daily permanently.

I see them as 2 separate problems with 2 separate solutions.

And if you wreck the coin with the biggest marketcap right now, it means cryptos have no "real price floor" trading-wise.

You basically sacrifice the progress made in being a "store-of-value" in order to force your solution for the other issue (scaling).

[Anonymous No.7129781]

>>7129735
this. so. much.

[Anonymous No.7129952]

>>7129735
> BUT I am opposed to a careless hardfork, as having an ETH/ETC fork scenario in bitcoin right now will most likely destroy the project.
There are forks all over the place and will probably continue to be as such as long as people view them as free money. The only fork that has the potential to actually kill BTC is BCH, and I think it will.

>I don't see any intentional sabotage, I just see that achieving consensus for something like a hard fork is extremely hard.
Forcibly restricting on chain throughput for actual transactions rather than mutant transactions to 14kbps is about a clear a case of sabotage as you're ever likely to find. If you can't see that, it's not because it's not there, it's because you're blind or not looking.

> I personally believe that we should let the market decide
Which it is

> (as consensus via methods like "miner signaling" is susceptible to Sybil attacks).
That's exactly what the purpose of mining and proof of work *is*, so sybil attacks can't work, you can't signal with hashing power you don't have, so I really don't even see where you're going with this one at all, it seems to be a position based in a fundamental misunderstanding of the system architecture.

>I don't see anyone pumping BCash though.
It's outperformed BTC since its inception by a long shot.

> To become a good store-of-value, the marketcap must increase to levels that whales cannot manipulate it easily (like gold's $8T). That's all that matters imo.
And nobody with 8T to control is going to put 8T into a terrible and obviously sabotaged product, which essentially discounts the possibility the asset will ever reach the target you are aiming for.

> And right now, bitcoin is the closest to achieving that.
Historical artefact. It is also bleeding, and it will bleed to death, because it is terrible and sabotaged.

[Anonymous No.7130038]

>>7129735
>For scaling to become digital cash, I believe off-chain is the only solution to global adoption. Block size increase WILL be necessary, but you can't store billions of transactions daily permanently.
It is not your place to say what you can or cannot store in a blockchain, it is the place of the people who actually store things in a blockchain to say what can and cannot be stored. You bid with those people for space in the blockchain, and if they see it as economically viable to include your transaction in it, they will do so. That might be at a hundred transactions per day or it might be at two hundred billion transactions per day, it really depends on the economics of the particular miner in question. Unless we're talking about sabotaged Bitcoin, with a centrally planned supply limit in order to artificially boost the business plan of Blockstream, which is of course, fucking ridiculous.
Yes, at some point in time it is very likely that it will reach a level whereby it does not make sense to include certain transactions in an actually optimally organised chain subject to free market forces, maybe you want to send a single satoshi to your kid for mowing the lawn and you wouldn't want to pay more than a hundredth of a satoshi for that, That's the actual genuine optimal use case for off chain scaling, and that is not something I view as either negative or impossible, just nowhere *near* necessary for the present environment and market cap and associated terrain within which we find ourselves.

>And if you wreck the coin with the biggest marketcap right now, it means cryptos have no "real price floor" trading-wise.
If the market doesn't punish the coin with the biggest market cap right now for its demonstrably idiotic strategy, it proves that the market is not efficient, and therefore not valuable. But it's already doing that, and here's to hoping it will continue until that piece of shit bleeds to death.

[Anonymous No.7130062]

>>7129952
>I don't see anyone pumping BCash though.
> It's outperformed BTC since its inception by a long shot.

Most alts have. The only thing that matters is marketcap, not % gain.

Random shitcoins have high % gain, but they don't get to the #1 marketcap spot.

> I personally believe that we should let the market decide
> Which it is

> And right now, bitcoin is the closest to achieving that.
> Historical artefact. It is also bleeding, and it will bleed to death, because it is terrible and sabotaged.

We'll see then.

Either way, if bitcoin dies and some other coin takes over, there's no way I'm putting my entire net worth in whatever new coin goes to #1 on coinmarketcap.

I'd rather sit in USD and index funds in that case.

And I'm sure there will be plenty of other people like me who will think the same.

After that, it's not a store of value. I'd probably keep only 5% of my net worth in just to speculate, nothing else.

But as I said, we'll see.

If Bitcoin loses #1 spot, then you'd be right, no? :)

[Anonymous No.7130086]

>>7121751
To fix this mess we need exchanges with fiat/crypto pairings like what they have on gdax but for alts OR simply add ETH pairings to everything so people don't have to go through bitcoin when trading their stacks.

[Anonymous No.7130129]

I bought around 28k BZC, how fucked am I?

[Anonymous No.7130136]

>>7130062
>If Bitcoin loses #1 spot, then you'd be right, no? :)
I would, yeah. I also would not keep 100% of my net worth in any single cryptoasset at the present point in time, and probably not for some time going forward. We're now in kind of an explosive phase of progress with regards to the technology with dozens of genuinely new approaches all being tested and subjected to competitive market forces. That's great terrain for me as a trader / operator in the space, but as someone that would just want to put money in at low to no risk and get a yield it's not great at all.

[Anonymous No.7130157]

>>7130129

[Anonymous No.7130193]

>>7130038
>It is not your place to say what you can or cannot store in a blockchain

I never did try to dictate it.
Apparently you didn't read my earlier post here >>7126302

> Imagine global scaling: everything is a transaction, even a parent giving their kid their daily allowance. Or people chipping in to pay a bill when eating out, each person will make a transaction. Also online use cases, like each ad view/click could be paid as a crypto transaction, or each tip a streamer/camgirl receives could be a transaction.

> It's going to be billions of transactions per day.

> It CANNOT be all saved on-chain.

> Only an off-chain solution would be scalable enough to work globally.

If you think that's practical to store everything permanently.... then I guess that's your opinion.

I see a problem with it, you don't.

This is why I think only off-chain scaling would be powerful enough to scale globally.

> If the market doesn't punish the coin with the biggest market cap right now for its demonstrably idiotic strategy,

That's your opinion.

I don't think being careful about hard forks is "idiotic strategy", nor do I think Lightning is.

At this point, we are just arguing opinions, so as I said, let's just agree to disagree, as you are the type of person that will never change your opinion.

On the other hand, I'm quite open minded, I was almost swayed to Raiblocks until I heard all the problems with it.

So you see, if you actually present something to me that will convince me, I'd change my mind.

Like I used to be a believer that ETH will eclipse BTC, and I actually am still on the edge of being convinced otherwise or not.

But BCH never had anything that convinced me. To me all it is, is an altcoin.

[Anonymous No.7130217]

>>7130038
>But it's already doing that, and here's to hoping it will continue until that piece of shit bleeds to death.
Anon calm down it's just 3000 of peer review code that came from an 8 page white paper. Not some evil forse trying to help the federal reserve lol

[Anonymous No.7130232]

if bitcoin is kill mcap will drop to $15m
call me before that happens i need to tether up

[Anonymous No.7130247]

>>7130193

back to /r/bitcoin with you. you couldn't be a more obvious redditfag.

[Anonymous No.7130313]

>>7121751
Name a coin with cheaper and faster transactions, I'll wait.

also any good smart contact or any dAPP that is working properly

[Anonymous No.7130314]

>>7130193
> If you think that's practical to store everything permanently.... then I guess that's your opinion.
What you don't seem to be grasping here is that it's very much a question of what the terrain is as to whether it's practical to store a transaction on chain. If we were back ten years ago then the restraints there technologically are very different to what they are now, and they will in turn be very different ten years from now. And there is no way to code into the software itself some magical oracle that always gives an optimal answer as to what the appropriate on chain throughput is, so the best you can do is leave it up to the actual miners to decide. Centrally planning a hard limit is the absolute most idiotic thing you could do.

> Like I used to be a believer that ETH will eclipse BTC, and I actually am still on the edge of being convinced otherwise or not.
ETH is not a currency and it's not trying to be, it's only being forced into that role because the underlying use case of the product is so great coupled with the fact that BTC is so utterly fucked at the moment.

> But BCH never had anything that convinced me. To me all it is, is an altcoin.
BCH is nothing more or less than BTC done correctly. That's really it. If you believed in the original vision of BTC, there is no legitimate reason to not believe in BCH. I can tell from listening to you that you think the on chain vs off chain and throughput capacity argument is that reason, but it's simply not. It only seems that way because BTC has artificially restricted on chain throughput such that it makes on chain transactions appear much slower, more expensive and generally cumbersome than they need necessarily be. And you can very easily verify that by looking at BCH.

[Anonymous No.7130377]

>>7130217
> Not some evil forse trying to help the federal reserve lol
In a world where lightning does actually get traction, and the artificial on chain transaction limit forces all traffic through lightning rather than on chain, you fail to realise it's setting up an obvious parallel to the traditional fractional reserve system of hubs controlling reserve currencies and settling with gold between themselves while they exsanguinate the main economy via manipulation of the money supply off chain. So no, either Lightning kills BTC outright, or it shambles around as a zombie which does indeed do exactly what you claim here it does not do; help the federal reserve and the traditional international banking forces to implement a new global fractional reserve system that they can claim was not imposed by them, but created organically by the people.

It absolutely deserves to bleed to death.

[Anonymous No.7130420]

>>7130232

tether was just subpoena'd. Their angus is peppered. Don't use it.

[Anonymous No.7130424]

>>7130313
Bitconnect, it's 90% cheaper than it was last month and it's working perfectly.

[Anonymous No.7130451]

>>7130424
i'm sold. where to buy?

[Anonymous No.7130625]

I'm still waiting for a Corecuck to explain which special property of BTC makes it "digital gold".

[Anonymous No.7130651]

>>7130625
The fact that bitcoin has 8000% annual inflation so far thia year :^)

Literally worse than zimbabwe money

[Anonymous No.7130661]

>"muh store of value"
>extremely volatile asset that could crash at any time in an extremely volatile market