Bitcoin Cash : Hidden Potential

[Anonymous No.9599913]

So BCH always gets hated on thanks to Roger Ver's shills, but let's look at one solid fact.

If Cryptocurrency goes up overall, BCH always has one of the largest percentage gains. However, the opposite is true. If cryptocurrency was to die, BCH would hit $0 first (As close to 0 as possible).

The real thing to look at is, "what if the cryptocurrency market double/tripled/etc in price?". Chances are, Bitcoin Cash would start closing the distance with BTC. If the entire cryptocurrency market inflated high enough, BCH would actually flip BTC at a certain point.

The real question is, will cryptocurrency ever go back up enough for BCH to realize its full potential? Someday, Bitcoin Cash may well take over Bitcore Core, but it'll be years from now. Dethroning the original Bitcoin won't be easy, but BCH has laid the grounds needed to do it.

[Anonymous No.9599940]

top tier spacing

[Anonymous No.9600023]

nice story man.. good written... well done sirs.

[Anonymous No.9600343]

BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB-BITCH I GOT THAT BITCOIN CASH!!!

[Anonymous No.9600401]

>>9599913

BCH $50k by december

[Anonymous No.9600426]

>>9600343

Craig Wright, Roger Ver and Jihan Wu own enough Bitcoin to tank the market for ten years. All the early adopters have switched over. Core is unironically finished

[Anonymous No.9600798]

>>9600426
>implying i didnt already know

[Anonymous No.9600820]

>>9599999
>>9600000

[Anonymous No.9601060]

>>9599913

Bitcoin Cash is the original Bitcoin. You're confusing names with functionality. Segwit and lightning don't represent Bitcoin at all.

[Anonymous No.9601140]

>>9599913
all BTC has right now is its ticker.
but it's a ferocious thing to have indeed.

[Anonymous No.9601204]

prepare to loose everything cashie, roger and fake satoshi CW are preparing for exit scam.

[Anonymous No.9601234]

>>9601060
>a fork with replay protection and 3x less work done is the real bitcoin
kek

[Anonymous No.9601437]

>>9601204

Stop bumping their threads. Paid shills can just circlejerk with each other and waste Vers money. We all know it's a scam, and so do they.

[Anonymous No.9601493]

>>9601437
has anyone explained this 'scam' meme?
who lost money from bch?
didn't all btc holders get bch too? how was it unfair?

[Anonymous No.9601516]

>>9601493

Corecucks are terrified the news will get out that bitcoin was hijacked by jews.

[Anonymous No.9601863]

[Anonymous No.9601878]

[Anonymous No.9601890]

[Anonymous No.9601912]

[Anonymous No.9601923]

[Anonymous No.9601985]

>>9601878
oh wow thats really, really good

admits the whole truth of the situation

[Anonymous No.9602099]

>>9601234
>a fork owned by a banking cartel who seek to move transactions off chain and replace miners with themselves

Kek deluded corecuck.

Bcore isn't even Bitcoin anymore, and as such work done is irrelevant.

[Anonymous No.9602128]

>>9601985
One of my favourite images

[Anonymous No.9602141]

>>9601493
Cirecucks dumped their BCH on the command of their kike overlords at Block stream for fuck all (<$300). Now they're terrified and hateful because its worth far more today and BCH adoption is growing rapidly.

There's like 40 forks of Bitcoin (including bcore) but BCH is the one they refuse to even name, smacks of fear aye

[Anonymous No.9602147]

[Anonymous No.9602169]

[Anonymous No.9602187]

[Anonymous No.9602199]

[Anonymous No.9602211]

[Anonymous No.9602221]

[Anonymous No.9602236]

[Anonymous No.9602243]

[Anonymous No.9602244]

>>9601985

this exactly.

you corecucks really see nothing wrong with blockstream? you take no issue with the decisions the core team has made and continues to make?

personalities aside you prefer lightning with 1mb blocks over scaling the main chain at all (even 2-4mb blocks and keeping segwit/2nd layer, just scale enough to prevent what happened in December during an adoption phase)?

by the way, the core faggots are just as shitty of people as ver/csw; they just aren't in the limelight.

I mean who do you think you should trust; independently super rich people who participate in Bitcoin's primary economic system (and thus have every reason to see it succeed as originally envisioned), or some guys who don't mine at all and are relatively poor, who are more beholden to outside companies (axa/blockstream) than bitcoin itself, and who have therefore created a system to move tx fees from miners to themselves (damaging the incentive system which secures BTC)?

Andresen should have never gave those corecucks github commit access. We would all have already made it if that never happened.

[Anonymous No.9602253]

>>9602099
>hurrr muh whitepaper says bcash is real bitcoin even though it objectively does not, for obvious reasons.
>hurrr muh whitepaper doesn't matter its not bitcoin cause a soft fork that needed 95% support to activate was activated, and some people made some software that works on bitcoin and other coins
deluded cashcucks are masters of mental gymnastics

[Anonymous No.9602262]

[Anonymous No.9602264]

>>9602253

the bitcoin whitepaper says nothing about off chain scaling that uses bitcoin as a base layer. lightning is not adherent to bitcoin's whitepaper and is contrary to its intended use which is for individuals to transfer it to each other, peer to peer, cryptographically secured by the blockchain. once you start including a "settlement layer" you are deviating from the intent.

[Anonymous No.9602274]

[Anonymous No.9602299]

>>9602253

These aren't arguments corecuck.

Tell me, why is bcore limited to 1MB? Tell me one single remotely plausible reason?

You can't, because there are no reasons. Bitcoin Cash is Bitcoin.

[Anonymous No.9602310]

>>9602264
In my view there is nothing wrong with a layer 2 built ontop of bitcoin. The problem arises when you intentionally cripple the blockchain to force people to use your layer 2.

[Anonymous No.9602319]

[Anonymous No.9602336]

>>9602244
https://github.com/luke-jr/bips/blob/bip-blksize/bip-blksize.mediawiki
Who actually ever says they want to keep the block size at 1mb??
Even fucking luke jr wants to increase it over time.
There are a bunch of proposals to increase the block size.

>>9602264
Lightning will work on bcash too you dumb faggot.
I guess that means its not the real bitcoin then right?

>>9602299
Because Satoshi himself put the limit there and was dumb enough not to fix it soon enough.
He wasn't a god.
Also because consensus is easier said than done.

Stick to reality brothers.

[Anonymous No.9602345]

>>9602310

how could Satoshi let his creation fall into the hands of brainlets such as this

[Anonymous No.9602357]

>>9602336
>ending at just under 31 MB in 2045 April

ahahahahah holy shit you bcorecucks are deluded as fuck. Just off yourself.

[Anonymous No.9602377]

>>9602336
That toothless rat Luke jr. wants to reduce bcore's blocksize to 300kb, not increase it you moron.

[Anonymous No.9602384]

>>9602336

lightning could work on it but that doesn't mean it will. bch miners do not support lightning, this is kind of the point. if you wanted bitcoin cash with lightning network, you will have to fork it in order to implement.

>>9602310
there isn't anything wrong with the idea of lightning network but it has nothing to do with what bitcoin is trying to accomplish. when you let lightning network take the wheel on your coin, what is underneath lightning network is arbitrary, and hence, bitcoin core will be useless and valueless.

[Anonymous No.9602403]

>>9602336

>stick to reality

jihan would be glad to see bch adopt the btc ticker, but he's true in saying that's not the world we live in now. as one of the faces of bch he's not interested in looking like he's organizing a coup, even if he is. that post was a publicity ploy to look amicable in his rivalry.

[Anonymous No.9602421]

>>9602336

lol so why didn't they raise it last year (when fees were already becoming a problem circa july/august) instead of forcing the hard fork that created BCH. If they agreed to 2mb last August we would only have BTC today, not this BTC/BCH rift.

Why are they keeping the block size way lower than it needs to be? These little non-mining nodes they argue for (which are an excuse not a reason; they do nothing that the miner nodes aren't already doing better) could easily handle 2-4 even 8 mb.

you genuinely don't believe there is no way they intentionally created a situation where people would see lightning as a necessary solution to BTC's supposed scaling problem?

[Anonymous No.9602457]

>>9602421
genuinely believe there is no way *

[Anonymous No.9602518]

>>9602384
>there isn't anything wrong with the idea of lightning network but it has nothing to do with what bitcoin is trying to accomplish. when you let lightning network take the wheel on your coin, what is underneath lightning network is arbitrary, and hence, bitcoin core will be useless and valueless.

The way I view layer 2s is that they are necessarily centralized. They can have whatever smoke and mirrors they want, but in the end it will be essentially the same as something like tippr bot, except more difficult to use.

[Anonymous No.9602562]

>>9602518

indeed. if it was decentralized, it doesn't need bitcoin. if it needs bitcoin, it's there because specific people need to solve the problem, which threatens decentralization. lightning network will be an achilles heel into the "debank the banks" "trustless" paradigms that bitcoin carried when it was introduced.

[Anonymous No.9602591]

>>9602518
Whelp, its a good thing you dont know what youre talking about then, isnt it?

[Anonymous No.9602910]

>>9602591

where did the core ppl go? seems like whenever the hard questions and actual discussion come out they disappear.