/biz/ - Business & Finance

bump for hot asian girls

>>14617709
BTC is dominating the whole market without mercy.
BCH is lost somewhere between all the garbage.
So what exactly makes you a BCH holder?

>>14617866
been a bitcoin holder since 2012. All the reasons that caused me to like bitcoin in the first place are applicable to BCH but no longer exist on BTC.

The idea of a digital "store of value" seems pretty dumb to be. I'm in this for a revolutionary non-state backed currency, not speculation on digital tulip bulbs.

>>14617838
bump for bitcoin cash

>>14617888
Why would a normie use crypto for everyday payments rather than fiat? Fiat already works perfectly well for payments. The problem with fiat is inflation, which you can avoid by saving in bitcoin. There is no need to spend it.

>>14618223
Fiat doesn't work perfect well. Have you tried transfering from Europe to Asia for example? Costly, slow, Sometimes the money just disappears.

>>14618223
people that say fiat works perfectly well for payments are delusional and never even sent money abroad.

>>14618223
I hire contractors around the world and oftentimes cryptocurrency is the only way to pay them.

>>14617709
just paid for my 4chan pass with BCH. If I used BTC the fee would have been more than 10% the cost of the pass itself.

I love BCH but what's the point of opposing to BTC?
Both coins are good, serve different purposes and will co-exist.
There's a reason why humanity always used 3 different metals to craft coins - gold, silver and copper.
Nobody was going to market to buy food with gold, it was used as savings and for large purchases.
BTC is going to be digital gold and store of value and BCH is gonna be used as silver for payments.

>>14617888
Boom. true that. 2011 buyer here. Bitcoin Cash is Bitcoin

Bch just works and it is easy to use

>>14618429
Paid for my 4channel pass using PayPal
Didn't have to pay any fees at all.

>>14619158
>can't tell if troll or really this new

The progress with BCH real-life adoption is pretty good desu. The best infrastructure by far

>>14617888
lol look at this pajeet, can't even english

>>14617709
BCH Gang reporting in

>>14618560
>I love BCH but what's the point of opposing to BTC?

because
>Both coins are good, serve different purposes and will co-exist.

this is wrong.
>BTC is going to be digital gold and store of value and BCH is gonna be used as silver for payments.

And because this is absurd. The idea that a useless "digital gold" can retain its value long term is total nonsense

checking in

No one actually likes BTC

>>14617866

Due to hashrate dynamics, BTC actually faces an existential threat that most people are blissfully unaware of.

As the price ratio of BCH to BTC increases, more hashrate will move away from BTC to maintain the most profitable split of mining power. As hashrate moves away from BTC, the blocks start coming slower which means even less transactional throughput and even higher fees.

Higher fees and more congested blocks, along with a rally in the BCH price ratio, could well cause even more people to try to fomo out of BTC and into BCH, exacerbating the effect even further.

At some point the BTC blocks will be coming so slowly that not only is the network barely functioning, but a difficulty adjustment looms farther and farther away (another thing most of the people buying crypto are unaware of is that BTC difficulty adjusts every 2,016 blocks, not every two weeks), meaning that even a difficulty adjustment cannot provide salvation.

Newly mined coins only become spendable after 100 blocks. Usually that's less than 24 hours but as hashrate moves away that could stretch into the days, making miners uncertain if they'll even be able to get their coins to an exchange and liquidate them in time to avoid the oncoming shitstorm.

I believe that the BCH rally that triggers such a bitcoin death spiral will actually happen well before the ratio hits 1:1

>>14619886
Yeah.

>>14618429
once people start really using bch it will have the same problems. i remember back in the day when satoshi dice was a big thing. that shit created thousands of tx per day. and it will come back on bch too. blockchain spam is becoming a big problem and it looks like small blocks and high fees is the only way to stop it.

>>14619980
wall of text but that was worth the read, thanks

>>14617709
thank god I dumped my bch from the hardfork when i could get 0.2 btc for it.

>>14620115
jfc no it won't. BCH could process 32 times as many transactions as BTC does today before encountering the same issues.

But the more important thing for you to realize is that the Bitcoin Cash community and developers value having a coin that actually functions well. BTC devs see no problem with capping their maximum daily transactions at 400k and having users pay $50 fees.

>>14620165
More like 12,000
https://old.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/c8kpuu/3000_txsec_on_a_bitcoin_cash_throughput_benchmark/esnm3no/

>>14620165
it wont take long. retards have to make spam services like weatherSV and casino games. and sites that allow uploading other assorted arbitrary data as well. wont be long before you are right back where you started fee wise. raising the blocksize without addressing this problem is only kicking the can down the road.

>>14620214
If you think it's inevitable that people will flood the chain with arbitrary data, then why don't we see that happening already?

>>14620214

https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/epicenter-172-peter-rizun-a-bitcoin-fee-market-without-a-blocksize-limit

>>14620260
we do. bch isnt being used so there is no need to spam it. its under the radar for now... you dont see spam on the btc chain because the fees are too high and the blocks are too small.

>>14620363
>tfw corecucks unironically think high fees are a feature and not a bug

>>14620413
they are a feature in their own way. what really needs to happen is a complete fork of the code and remove whatever part allows all this arbitrary junk data. none of that shit should have ever been allowed. blockchain wasnt invented so we can all store mp3s and CP and weather data in it. that shit needs to go.

>>14618861
I actually used to believe that...i feel for the big blocks meme too and return of op_codes.

over the past yr i've realized and admitted that i was wrong. BTC with high txn fees is the future. It will never be a "payment solution" itself (LN will fail), but there will be tons of payment wallets (Calibra, CashApp, etc) which will allow seamless btc-alt coin/fiat conversion and will handle payments.
Look at things unemotionally and you will see the truth.

>>14620455
basically this. all that would be required is for the owner of a wallet to sign a verification message with his key to receive credits for some other medium of exchange. tokens credit cards whatever it may be.

>>14620489
yes and after you sign that you have those funds, you will "reserve" an amount between your exchange and the wallet provider.

the wallets-exchanges will all have agreements to do batching....so once an hour coinbase will batch settle to wallet provider a lump sum that represents all movement in last hour...that $50 txn fee will be amortized over 50k transactions.

Basically same way visa now works with banks at internet speed.

>>14620549
> a centralised system just like banks.
Wow, that result sounds super familiar
https://old.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/7fsbw5/divorcing_the_settlement_and_transaction_layers/
Cashies were right all along.

>>14620768
decentralization is a meme. its not possible. miner cartels run bitcoin and staking cartels will run eth. theres no way around it.

>>14620803
> decentralization is a meme.
Then go back to the shitty centralised traditional banking system if you honestly believe that. You're wrong, of course, but you deserve each other.
> miner cartels run bitcoin
Then why haven't they crushed BCH? Why did 90% of them defect when it was profitable to do so? Why have they loudly announced they view BTC as a sabotage attempt and are simply mining it for profitability while it exists only in the short term?
> taking cartels will run eth.
I find this more plausible because of the problems with proof of stake, but even this isn't guaranteed.

>>14620549
I love how you guys took something so simple and revolutionary and used it to invent a convoluted banking 2.0 system. greatjob

>>14620768
i understand. i don't hate bch as i think it was a worthwhile experiment, but we must be able to admit when we misjudged the market.
there is simply no way to make inroads into payment/transaction space...those spaces are "last mile" already controlled by regional cartels. Letting them handle it is obvious and only next step in adoption. Moreover the regulatory pressures are going to be much less if you are just SoV and let payment processors jump through regulatory hoops.
I do hold a small percentage in bch as a hedge, but its increasingly obvious that the btc was right...i'm surprised to say that considering how 180-degree different i felt a year ago.

>>14620879
there is no conspiracy here. you need to have an honest view of the complexities of the landscape and find a niche to defend. trying to take on the whole world at every level is just a recipe for disaster.

>>14617709
>When BTC fails spectacularly, BCH will be the obvious choice for users and services who just need a simple to use online cash equivalent.
>obvious choice
lmao - not a chance in hell you pathetic reddit faggot. why did you come here?

>>14620935
> but we must be able to admit when we misjudged the market.
I admit I misjudged the degree of stupidity and ignorance in the market. It is utterly *packed* with both. That doesn't mean that I'm planning on becoming stupid and ignorant in turn though, it means I'm planning for when the system disintegrates due to that stupidity and ignorance as in >>14619886
> there is simply no way to make inroads into payment/transaction space...
If that were true, they would've stopped BCH too rather than just sabotaging it with BTC and failing to stop it for everyone who realised what was happening and avoided the attack. It's not true.
> Moreover the regulatory pressures are going to be much less if you are just SoV and let payment processors jump through regulatory hoops.
The entire project was started to tell regulators and central banks to go fuck themselves. BCH remains the platform from which you can credibly do that.

>>14621076
>regulators and central banks to go fuck themselves. BCH remains the platform from which you can credibly do that.
and this is the rub senpai.
you wont get mass adoption without "playing the game". Its like those linux fanboys in 1995 who thought the future was grandma booting up slackware. Instead of seeing that grandma would use linux in 1000s ways and never know it (webservers, embedded set-top box, etc).

I'm not against your vision of the world but you're not being realistic of how this is going to play out. Think you can win in david-goliath fight by going head-on is simply wrong. Let them swallow a harmless poison pill.....

>>14621206
> you wont get mass adoption without "playing the game". Its like those linux fanboys in 1995 who thought the future was grandma booting up slackware. Instead of seeing that grandma would use linux in 1000s ways and never know it (webservers, embedded set-top box, etc).
There's nothing that stops people from wrapping the actual transactable reliable peer to peer electronic cash in whatever normie friendly marketed plastic edged shit they like. As long as it's using the units and architecture behind the scene, just like linux, it will prevail, just like linux did. The guys who didn't understand how fucking retarded grandma is understand it very well now, they still ended up right about what happened behind the scenes, and they will still end up right this time too. The system works and competes too well with everything else *not* to be used in this context, it will be used in this context, it is being used in this context already, and it will continue to accelerate. That's just the way it's going to be.
> Let them swallow a harmless poison pill.....
That's what BTC is. They bought a sabotaged trainwreck maintained by absolute morons that can't even deliver on the scam they had planned for it, and they spent so much time and money on it that I find their failure hilarious and schadenfreude filled. They failed because they think regulatory and media control is enough, that they can do anything as long as they have that. Well, I've worked in this field all my life and I've seen this pattern repeat over and over again, and the fact is that they're wrong. They were wrong with linux vs windows, they have been wrong in every similar situation, and they will be wrong in BCH vs BTC. It's just a matter of time, because those of us behind BCH, just like when we were behind linux, are stubborn fucks that simply will not surrender.

>>14617888
Nice triples, here is the real 'set in stone' version.

>>14621301
>There's nothing that stops people from wrapping the actual transactable reliable peer to peer electronic cash in whatever normie friendly marketed plastic edged shit they like. As long as it's using the units and architecture behind the scene, just like linux, it will prevail,
This is precisely what BTC is doing.
CashApp is prime example. Swap back and forth between fiat/btc but transact in fiat.
Calibra / Libra is going to further this model. Given CB being a partner in this, no doubt BTC is going to be the 'digital gold' to libra's fiat.

Im simply saying the dream of having a single crypto that does it all is not going to happen. The payment / transaction space is going to be its own industry which will largely be agnostic to any specific crypto...they will abstract away the problem and wont care if its bch or btc as the 'digital gold', the actual txn will take place from wallet provider to merchant. Just wait until Visa gets into the wallet game to understand how it will really play out.

As an aside, its curious bchers contantly talk about "decentralization" yet your vision is a one-size fits all solution where bch takes over every single space. Its not realistic fren - the levels of complexity are too much.

>>14621423
BTC really is boomercoin after all. You guys see the high price and thinks it makes you right.

A savvy investor sees what's coming on the horizon, not what's in his face. By the time something appears in-your-face obvious the smart money has already moved on to the next play. It's curious that so many of the early adopters who were right about bitcoin then and became billionaires because of their foresight are now backing BCH.

>>14621423
> This is precisely what BTC is doing.
Limiting the chain to 4tx per second forever and forcing a centralised second layer is not that. It changes the underlying product from uncontrolled decentralised peer to peer electronic cash to just another bank product. The entire reason that bitcoin competes so well with the old system is because of the uncontrolled decentralised nature of it, you take that away and you're paying the same bribes and political games and regulatory capture nonsense you're playing with the mainstream financial system, which is where the massive economic deadweight loss exists, which means that competitive advantage has just evaporated, and now BTC is just a shitty bank product *with* the added overhead of the decentralisation theatre of BTC, making it compete poorly even with other shitty bank products.
> Im simply saying the dream of having a single crypto that does it all is not going to happen.
I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying on a long enough timeline the best products will win, and all the regulatory and media interference in the world just won't change that given the massive competitive advantage being able to tell the central banks and regulators of the world to get fucked actually is. By extension, you take that advantage away, whatever candidate you're evaluating can no longer compete as well as the ones that still have it. It's not just this nice to have thing on the side that is impossible, it's this very possible thing that is the central value proposition for the ledger, which removing actually negates all the value from.
> As an aside, its curious bchers contantly talk about "decentralization" yet your vision is a one-size fits all solution where bch takes over every single space.
That isn't the BCH vision at all, the BCH vision is simply the original bitcoin vision, decentralised peer to peer electronic cash, That doesn't mean many other projects, and even projects that can credibly compete, are worthless.

>>14621522
>4tx per second forever and forcing a centralised second layer is not that. It
well the 4tx isn't forever its only "for now". there is nothing that prevents an upgrade in 5 years...but truthfully may never be necessary. Batched settlements between wallet and exchange will simply transfer lump sum of all outstanding transactions once per day or whatever. The $100 txn fee will be amortized over 100k transactions. User will only be deducted .01 by exchange for their share.

I actually fully agree that LN is garbage and will never see real world use (CashApp and its brethren are the real LN).
>BCH vision at all, the BCH vision is simply the original bitcoin vision, decentralised peer to peer electronic cash,
I accept that description of BCH and probably agree it was satoshi's original idea. Its entirely possible that it plays out like that in 15-20yrs...until then its not the strategy for success.

>>14621630
> well the 4tx isn't forever its only "for now".
It's a firmly established tenet of cult dogma, Attempting to change it will result in a massive rebellion of clueless normies that were brainwashed into wearing retarded no2x hats ad et al at every previous juncture political control was consolidated around the present architecture. You think you can change it without consequence? Good luck with that, you're going to need it. Recruiting cultists without the ability to think critically has consequences, and continuous schisms and sticking to stupid dogma is a time honoured one amongst them.
> I accept that description of BCH and probably agree it was satoshi's original idea. Its entirely possible that it plays out like that in 15-20yrs...until then its not the strategy for success.
It doesn't get to play out that way unless those of us who can see the competitive advantage and do the necessary work stay the course.
And so that is what I will do, no matter what stands in my way.

forget bch, it still uses sha256. Bitcoin Gold is down over 95% from it's high, so it's got nothing but upside and can't be 51% attacked because it uses equihash.

>>14621689
https://www.trustnodes.com/2018/05/24/bitcoin-gold-51-attacked-18-million-stolen-double-spends
https://shop.bitmain.com/product/detail?pid=00020190612163103083C98EYrjL0668

>>14621630
>there is nothing that prevents an upgrade in 5 years...but truthfully may never be necessary

lmao are you guys serious? 4tx/s will be enough for eternity but maybe we can finally handle more than 1 megabyte five years from now. Give me a break

>>14621750
i understand ...but I respond to how the market views things, not a particular block size ideology.
the bch/btc ratio is now only .035 and falling.
When do you think the market is suddenly going to value big blocks?

>>14621798
When it is purged of the present flood of stupidity and manipulation.

>>14621873
oh ok...when humans become smart...i see

>>14621740
I'm still hodling from the fork. It will moon sir.

>>14621896
No, not when humans become smart, the entire point of legitimate markets is that sooner or later, you have to pay the piper on reality. if >>14619886 happens, which it very easily could from a huge variety of different causes, it instantly becomes obvious that the emperor has no clothes. Lightning is an epic failure, and the cultists are just desperately trying not to notice it. Frankly there is *nothing* that is going to plan in BTC world, it's just a pack of idiots yelling at each other they're going to buy lambos and drive them on the moon. Sooner or later market reality will re-assert itself, it always does, South Sea, Dutch Tulips, 2k8 housing market, etc. It always ends the same way, stupid bubbles based on nothing burst. Fraud, stupidity, and manipulation will only get so far.

>>14622024
what kind of timeline we looking at here? 1 year, 2 years, 5, 10, 20, 100?

>>14622080
We're already in the "everytihng is fucked and everybody is just pretending that it isn't" phase, so what was that in 2k8.. a quarter or two later that everything actually hit? This is a very small sector by comparison, so maybe it can hide longer. I'm not a fortune teller, I don't know when it will happen, just that it will.

>>14621798
>When do you think the market is suddenly going to value big blocks?

Probably when they are confronted with the realities of $50 transaction fees and BTC transactions lingering unconfirmed for 2 weeks at a time once again.

>>14617709
>0.036

>>14622370
Don't really give a fuck, it still works better

>>14622381
i'm sure it does faux bitcoin is just not what people want that's all.

>>14622394
They'll want it when they can't even send their "real bitcoin" anywhere because the fees cost 50% of the entire amount they own.

>>14622426
ahhahah of course 50%... btc is the cheapest and fastest fucking method of transferring low to medium amounts of money i use right now so long it beats the living crap out of bank wires for high amounts this will never be an issue.

>>14617709
The Tenthening is coming. Prepare.

>>14622540
yeah bullshit if you actually used your crypto instead of leaving it sitting in your binance account you would know that's not true at all

>>14622931
but it is true. currently to send an international bank wire is $35 and takes 48 hrs.

Fees are about $3.5 now for 1 hr transfer.

How much money did you faggots lose by selling bitcoin for your chink shitcoin? Kek

>>14622931
it's true i paid fraction on sending btc than what i pay for equal value on fiat. think $1.50 instead of $50 for $9k.

>>14622983
i have to admit i'm patient and wait for the mempool to empty out before i sent my btc. i never paid $3.50 in fees in my life. but evven that would be awesome for fiat wires.

>>14622931
not to mention ln will make micropayments instant and cheap af. thanks to the so hated segwit.

I always loved BCH. Screw BTC and especially kyc faketoshi BSV. Hook me up with some more BCH senpai Ver qp7hs5kyg5ny5aztvl09lzys8amzsvu0x5gaeta3n2

>>14617709
Does anyone have this meme template?

>>14620873
Let me ask you a question. When is something considered decentralized? If I have only a singular server, it is considered centralized. However if I add an additional server, it becomes decentralized since there isn’t a singular point of failure. Now if I add 100 servers the probability that all of those will go down at the same time is very low. But they’re still classified under the same term, decentralization.
For the added security, of additional service (decreasing the probability of downtime), you increase the inefficiency of your system. Each server has to be synced with one another. For two servers this is no issue, but for hundreds if not thousands it becomes cumbersome.

Decentralization is a spectrum and it has trade offs with efficency. The more decentralized, the harder it is to maintain consensus, and the harder it is to send information.

>>14617888
>I'm in this for a revolutionary non-state backed currency

so why aren't you holding monero?

i actually wonder this about roger ver, has anyone ever asked him this publicly?

>>14623223
virgin: waiting for the mempool to clear so i can send a transaction
chad: sending transactions for a fraction of a penny whenever you feel like

>>14623621
gotchu senpai

>>14623949
> Let me ask you a question. When is something considered decentralized? I
This is a simple problem that people pretend is complex because they can find no other justification for their idiotic architecture. Simply examine what "decentralised" means in the context of its employment and its utility to bitcoin; To evade the monetary controls of states and central banks. it says that very directly right there in the genesis block of the chain, and Satoshi states it outright when he said that we could create a space free from political meddling via these mechanisms.
So, in light of that employment, how much sense does it make to force the ledger to only be able to process 4tx/sec in peer to peer decentralised manner it was intended, whilst forcing all other global transaction volume to a layer above it where you literally bid for centrality with your stake. That is obviously sabotage that anyone but the most braindead moron could see.
But the world is absolutely awash in braindead morons.

>>14625185
i can send whenever i fell like i just feel like doing so with minimal fees on the only network that has actual worth and value.

>>14624237
I know he's said that if something better than Bitcoin (BCH) comes along he will have no hesitation in switching to it.
Perhaps its to do with the scalability, or maybe having some traceable transactions is a feature, not a bug. It certainly helps to get past regulators : monero is banned from all exchanges in Japan

>>14626690
The optional privacy measures on bch mean it gets through jurisdictions like Japan regulatory regime much easier, and monero has a very stupid approach to proof of work, as well as a lack of t to learn in general about the space. They keep laing amateur hour mistakes, and in the case of their stance on proof of work they're unwilling to accept they're wrong now matter how many tim s it's proven. Thus they come across as ideologically inclined with only a single interesting feature to peddle and thus although not worthless, not really competition for BCH. The closest thing BCH has to genuine actual competition is dash, and it has something like 30 times lower value transfer per day by comparison and plenty of problems of its own outside that.