Consensus 2018

[Anonymous No.9383914]

Is this good for us or just a networking circle jerk for existing blockchains and coins?

[Anonymous No.9383917]

>>9383914
Check price history during other Consensus events.

[Anonymous No.9383975]

This year, there has been negative action arnd consensus. normally it moons during this time

[Anonymous No.9383981]

>>9383914
Sergey is just going for the free buffet and cheap whores

[Anonymous No.9384140]

You'd think we'd be mooning, but this is the first year there is a major chainsplit with actual support. BCH is about to btfo everyone this year. It's also no coincidence that they are upgrading May 15th in the middle of the fucking event!

[Anonymous No.9384162]

>>9384140
Absolutely no one gives a fuck about Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin Private, Bitcoin Gold, Bitcoin Diamond, Bitcoin Prime, Bitcoin Dark or all the rest. There is one Bitcoin. If the rest want to taken seriously, then they should get their own name. Why don't they? It's not like "Bitcoin" is the pinnacle or originality anyway.

[Anonymous No.9384184]

>>9384162
>No one gives a fuck about bitcoin private

[Anonymous No.9384185]

>>9384162
>Absolutely no one gives a fuck about Bitcoin Cash
That delusion is going to make you very poor someday.

[Anonymous No.9384207]

>>9384162
>he doubts me? fork it

[Anonymous No.9384246]

just a reminder, if you are looking for nice Consensus pump.

[Anonymous No.9384342]

It's going to dump leading into Consensus. Then it's going to dump even harder once people realize there won't be a magical 70%+ Consensus pump/recovery. $6000 (at MOST) by end of next week.

[Anonymous No.9384367]

>>9384342
Good call.

[Anonymous No.9384378]

>>9384185

>someday

better than staying poor today

[Anonymous No.9384379]

>>9384184
>>9384185
Why don't they get their own name? It doesn't matter if they name it "Roger's Kool Coin" or even something like "Bitcash" it's just incommensurable dumb to insist on using the name that's already in use by the main player in the field. It's like if you start a tech company and insist on calling yourself Microsoft. No amount of "No, I'm Microsoft" will cut it. Can it be a better coin than Bitcoin and flippen Bitcoin? Sure, why not. But it can be a better Bitcoin than Bitcoin, because it's not Bitcoin. If it wants to be taken seriously, it needs to get its own name.

[Anonymous No.9384397]

>>9384342

BTC will tank/plateau. ETH will pump hard. So will another certain token...

https://www.hyperledger.org/event/consensus-2018

[Anonymous No.9384399]

>>9384185
>>9384207
Why don't they get their own name? It doesn't matter if they name it "Roger's Kool Coin" or even something like "Bitcash" it's just incommensurable dumb to insist on using the name that's already in use by the main player in the field. It's like if you start a tech company and insist on calling yourself Microsoft. No amount of "No, I'm Microsoft" will cut it. Can it be a better coin than Bitcoin and flippen Bitcoin? Sure, why not. But it can't be a better Bitcoin than Bitcoin, because it's not Bitcoin. If it wants to be taken seriously, it needs to get its own name.

[Anonymous No.9384400]

>>9384379
Bitcoin is an open source project and Cash has more claim to the name than Segwit anyway.

[Anonymous No.9384413]

>>9384397
links of chains, perhaps?

[Anonymous No.9384415]

>>9384399
its not going to, get over it

[Anonymous No.9384416]

>>9384185
Wall street is getting into ONLY Bitcoin. What do you think will happen to bch shit coin then?

[Anonymous No.9384433]

>>9384379
>Why don't they get their own name?
The problem with zcash/zclassic was shit branding. "Bitcoin Private" solves that. It's a simple idea but simple ideas can be good ideas.
In the case of bcash, they assumed because "bitcoin cash" is an awkward thing to say, people would start calling it "bitcoin". A stupid assumption from a stupid team.

[Anonymous No.9384434]

>>9384400
it isn't called Bitcoin segwit you idiot

[Anonymous No.9384437]

>>9384416
>Wall street
>people who deal with money constantly are going to want a currency that has literally no ability to deal with throughput demand
>waiting hours to days and paying $60 to move money is somehow advantageous for Wall street

[Anonymous No.9384452]

>>9384400
Maybe, but anything that calls itself Bitcoin X will never surpass Bitcoin, because it will always seem like a subset/subclass of Bitcoin, and thus lower in the hierarchy. In other words, it's a cucked name.

[Anonymous No.9384465]

>>9384246
one of my biggest bags

v bullish

[Anonymous No.9384474]

>>9384433
Zcash and zclassic are dumb names. Bitcoin Private is just trying to latch itself on and steal value by using the name Bitcoin. Just like every other fork.

[Anonymous No.9384497]

>>9384246
Who's this stinker

[Anonymous No.9384520]

>>9384465
I have just recently jumped in when I saw they are big sponsors at Consensus, CEO speaking at the mainstage and releasing a finished product there.
also nice partnerships announced and to be announced in this month.

It just is really strange that I never see any talk about this project. with 70mil market cap there is very good chance for good gains after they get more visibility thanks to Consensus.

exciting times ahead.

[Anonymous No.9384525]

>>9384465
more like cleveland steamer amirite

[Anonymous No.9384535]

>>9384474
How is it stealing value? Every Bitcoin holder gets free btcp, and unlike some people the btcp devs actually recognise the hard work that has gone into creating bitcoin.

[Anonymous No.9384550]

>>9384433
Like you say, Bcash is less tedious to say than Bitcoin Cash, but it does look a bit dumb to see written out. It could call itself something like Bitcash or ideally something more original (like Monero did when it changed its name from Bitmonero).

When you're a get rich quick scam like Bitcoin Private and want to be lazy with marketing, sure you can use Bitcoin in the name to ride its coattails, but when you claim and seem to be serious about it and make it a multibillion dollar business, then for fuck's sake get your own name.

[Anonymous No.9384554]

>>9384497
Henri Pihkala, CEO of Streamr

[Anonymous No.9384684]

>>9384550
But the name is the whole point of btcp. Zclassic was a great coin with garbage marketing. Now you have a great coin with great marketing. It's win win.

[Anonymous No.9384747]

>>9384162
Good investors don't get emotionally involved. You are emotionally involved to the point of delusion. Guess what? I go were the money is. Not where the memeotions are

[Anonymous No.9384748]

>>9384437
Sweetie, Bitcoin is store of value and will replace digital gold.

Digitized fiat will be king everywhere else in time. 99% of coins do not need to exist.

[Anonymous No.9384772]

>>9384747
You might be projecting, because I really don't care much, right now I have 0 BTC and 0 BCH. What I'm bothered by is idiocy.

[Anonymous No.9384791]

>>9384748
>store of value
Falling for that meme is going to get rekt, friendo. Store of value is a secondary function not a primary.

[Anonymous No.9384843]

>>9384397
How exactly does this point to Link? Help a brainlet out.

[Anonymous No.9384859]

Thinking of getting some Fusion and Hydrogen for Consensus. Any thoughts?

[Anonymous No.9384865]

>>9383914
>Is this good for us or just a networking circle jerk for existing blockchains and coins?

it's good for iexec

[Anonymous No.9384874]

>>9384859
Hydrogen has been shilled for a few days, so make sure to check if it's still at a reasonable price before jumping in if you don't want to be left holding /biz/'s bags. Don't know about Fusion.

[Anonymous No.9384917]

>>9384874
It's doubled in the last week but is still fairly low and only listed on shit exchanges

[Anonymous No.9385001]

>>9384791
Store of value is defacto it's primary function. Lightning takes time to expand and then it can do payments, too.

[Anonymous No.9385033]

>>9385001
It bums me out that biz doesn't give a shit about lightning. Imo it's going to eat everyone's dinner.

[Anonymous No.9385041]

>>9385001
>>9385033
>falling for the LN meme

phams...

[Anonymous No.9385046]

>>9385033
I've yet to actually see anyone address the claim that lightning effectively centralizes Bitcoin.

[Anonymous No.9385052]

>>9385046
Where have you looked?

[Anonymous No.9385083]

>>9385052
I go off its whitepaper.

> Eventually, with optimizations, the network will look alot like the correspondent banking network

https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf

[Anonymous No.9385092]

is anyone from biz gonna be there? i live in nyc itll be dope to hang out with you guys

[Anonymous No.9385127]

>>9385083
Right. Well if you're having trouble understanding the white paper maybe you should try one of the thousands of videos, articles and forum posts that discuss it for the lay reader. Just a thought.

[Anonymous No.9385129]

>>9384437
You fell for the memes my fren. Btc doesn't cost $60 to move nor does it take days.

[Anonymous No.9385141]

>>9385092
You don't want to hang out with anyone from here.

[Anonymous No.9385161]

>>9385127
>written in plain English
>y-you j-ust don't understand

okay

>>9385129
Hi newfriend. You don't even need to look far back to see what I'm talking about.

[Anonymous No.9385210]

>>9385052
I haven't gone out to research it because I'm not ideologically or financially invested in the state of Bitcoin centralization. But is it not the case that open channels in the network can only transfer sums smaller than those locked into the channel? And would this not lead to the use of centralized (large) pools which could open (and keep open) high throughput channels?

[Anonymous No.9385213]

>>9385161
You said you don't understand. In fact, you said you've never even seen anyone address the issue!
>I've yet to actually see anyone address the claim that lightning effectively centralizes Bitcoin.
Which is incredible.
Unless you don't know what "address" means?

[Anonymous No.9385232]

>>9385210
>I haven't gone out to research it
If you don't care, then don't waste my time :)

[Anonymous No.9385255]

>>9385213
>>I've yet to actually see anyone address the claim that lightning effectively centralizes Bitcoin.
I never said that. You were asking anon where he looked, I was just explaining I formed my opinion from the horses mouth. LN is literally a banking solution to keep banks relevant despite disruptive tech.

[Anonymous No.9385275]

>>9384772
Fact is projection now? Good to know.

[Anonymous No.9385286]

>>9385255
I doubt you are qualified to understand the paper or its implications, it's actually pretty technical.
People who aren't drowning in their own hubris go out and read articles and discussions to help them understand, but you do you.

[Anonymous No.9385300]

>>9384452
This is literally one of my investment guidelines

Never buy anything called Xcoin, other than for a pump n dump

[Anonymous No.9385321]

>>9385286
The implications of how the network, works is laid out. Do tell though, since you're the expert on this whitepaper where I'm wrong.

[Anonymous No.9385416]

>>9385321
>I pretend to read whitepapers
>I get into arguments about things I don't understand
>I demand anons do my research for me
yeah that's a hard pass from me

[Anonymous No.9385433]

>>9385416
So that's a no, you disingenuous piece of shit.

[Anonymous No.9385436]

>>9383914
it's good that we're correcting a bit before consensus, the bullrun and hype will continue in a few days

[Anonymous No.9385445]

100% chinks niggers pajeets and jews with a smaidge of euro scammers. absolute shitcoin fest. If a company is showing or some jackass talks tech there their coin is a shitcoin. Its a marker for what not to buy, if its at consensus its a fucking cold stinking pile of shit

[Anonymous No.9385455]

>>9384397
Nothing about this will help out your little purple pos token

[Anonymous No.9385475]

>>9385433
What's disingenuous? You're a lazy cunt, it's totally reasonable to not spoonfeed you.

[Anonymous No.9385480]

>>9385445

[Anonymous No.9385501]

>>9385475
You can't refute my argument or even what is written in the whitepaper. Your only excuse is "uhh its too complicated lol" and maybe for you it is.

[Anonymous No.9385528]

>>9385501
You saw the word "bank" and got scared.
That's not an argument, so it can't be refuted. There. Happy?

[Anonymous No.9385557]

>>9385528
Its intended function is that of a banking network. That is the end goal of this 2nd layer "solution". Why in the fuck would crypto need a banking solution? Hmm, hard one maybe Lightning is designed for banks?

[Anonymous No.9385567]

Don't say you weren't warned about RLC

[Anonymous No.9385651]

>>9385557
>Why in the fuck would crypto need a banking solution?
I can't even parse how retarded this sentence is.
What point do you think you're making here?

[Anonymous No.9385711]

>>9385651
That crypto doesnt need banksters.

[Anonymous No.9385735]

>>9385711
Great point very deep

[Anonymous No.9385754]

>>9385567
My stack isn’t big enough

[Anonymous No.9386397]

>>9384162

You are forgetting Bitcoin Omega Ruby and Bitcoin Alpha Sapphire