/biz/ - Business & Finance

I need arrows

>>20552138
What kind of an asshole has the patience to wait another 1.5 years

>>20552138
i am starting with $ amount i had at the peak of last bubble, i guess i am
lets hope i cash out this time

Not gonna happen. Btc is fundamentally flawed and will soon die. Stop smoking the hopium.

Bitcoin is fundamentally flawed and has literally ZERO chance to succeed in the long term. Zero, it just can´t work. Who knows if the price will rise in the short/medium term, but it will fail in the end. Other cryptos will probably have success long term, but bitcoin will drag them all down, therefore bitcoin will be killed soon when they can´t milk it anymore.
Bitcoin lacks a very good codebase, is becoming more centralized, lacks innovation, lacks on chain governance, liquidity will drop over time, other coins will catch up, undercutting and selfish mining strategies will undermine the security, miners revenue will drop, and it wastes resources. It´s also extremely manipulated beyond anything you can imagine. It´s not a good currency nor a good store of value. It´s only good for making money, like I do on the reg.

>>20552138
People have been saying this every year since 2013. Doesnt mean its going to happen

>>20552138
Can btc really go to 200k?

Btc at 9K will look like a joke in a few years, don't know if 2021 or when, but 200K is possible in a few years

4 million btc will soon be lost forever, probably by the end of the year, which is very bearish.
Bitcoins get lost forever every day. Simple math proves that in the end there will only be a few thousand btc left in circulation. A lot of bitcoin will also be locked up in funds like grayscale, which means the owner don´t hold the keys themself, which kinda defeats the purpose of crypto. These factors suggest that bitcoin volume, liquidity and demand for on chain transactions will eventually fall to very low levels. Low volume and liquidity is a death sentence for a speculative asset that people hoard and not use. Combine this with low revenue for miners, because of few on chain transactions and no block rewards, the hash rate will drop, and so will the cost of executing a 51% attack. Bitcoin has literally 0 chance of working long term. 0

>>20552248
I read the same shit on here so many years ago...and you people were wrong.

“Here’s how things could go wrong. Due to the possibility of profitable forking, the default strategy is no longer best; we lay out a menagerie of interesting and bizarre strategies in the paper. The most worrisome is “undercutting,” where miners capture aslittleof the available transaction fees as they can get away with, leaving the rest in the pool as an incentive for the next miner to extend their block rather than a competing block.
We also show rigorously thatselfish mininggets worse when block rewards are replaced by transaction fees, motivated by the following intuition: if you happen to mine a new block just seconds after the last one was found, you gain nothing by publishing, so you might as well keep it for selfish mining in case you get lucky. The variance in transaction fees enables strategies like this that simply don’t make sense when the block reward is fixed.”

>>20552254
Its every 4th year. Check chart

“As security researcher Dan Kaminsky explains, Bitcoin looks like a security nightmare on paper. A C++ code base with a custom binary protocol powers nodes connected to the Internet while holding e-cash, sounds like a recipe for disaster. C++ programs are often riddled with memory corruption bugs. When they are connecting to the Internet, this creates vulnerabilities exploitable by remote attackers. E-cash gives an immediate payoff to any attacker clever enough to discover and exploit such a vulnerability. Fortunately, Bitcoin’s implementation has proven very resilient to attacks thus far, with some exceptions. In August 2010, a bug where the sum of two outputs overflowed to a negative number allowed attackers to create two outputs of 92233720368.54 coins from an input of 0.50 coins. More recently, massive vulnerabilities such as the heartbleed bug have been discovered in the OpenSSL libraries. These vulnerabilities have one thing in common, they happened because languages like C and C++ do not perform any checks on the operations they perform. For the sake of efficiency, they may access random parts of the memory, add integers larger than natively supported, etc. While these vulnerabilities have spared Bitcoin, they do no not bode well for the security of the system.”

There is an even deeper problem with proof-of-work, one that is much harder to mitigate than the concentration of mining power: a misalignment of incentives between miners and stakeholders. Indeed, in the long run, the total mining revenues will be the sum of the all transaction fees paid to the miners. Since miners compete to produce hashes, (5) It is possible that a new technology will supplant ASICs who themselves replaced FPGA boards. However, the pace of this type of innovation is nowhere fast enough to prevent miners from forming dominating positions for long period of times; and such innovation would benefit but a new (or the same) small clique of people who initially possess the new technology or eventually amass the capital to repeat the same pattern. (6) the amount of money spent on mining will be slightly smaller than the revenues. In turn, the amount spent on transactions depends on the supply and demand for transactions. The supply of transactions on the blockchain is determined by the block size and is fixed.

>>20552138
no, it will take longer, the cycles always increase in time my bet the next high will be around 2024

“Unfortunately, there is reason to expect that the demand for transactions will fall to very low levels. People are likely to make use of off-chain transaction mechanisms via trusted third parties, particularly for small amounts, in order to alleviate the need to wait for confirmations. Payment processors may only need to clear with each other infrequently. This scenario is not only economically likely, it seems necessary given the relatively low transaction rate supported by Bitcoin. Since blockchain transaction will have to compete with off-chain transaction, the amount spent on transactions will approach its cost, which, given modern infrastructure, should be close to zero. Attempting to impose minimum transaction fees may only exacerbate the problem and cause users to rely on off-chain transaction more. As the amount paid in transaction fees collapses, so will the miner’s revenues, and so will the cost of executing a 51% attack. To put it in a nutshell, the security of a proofof-work blockchain suffers from a commons problem[9]. Core developer Mike Hearn has suggested the use of special transactions to subsidize mining using a pledge type of fund raising[10]. A robust currency should not need to rely on charity to operate securely”

“Impact on Bitcoin security. If any of the deviant mining strategies we explore were to be deployed, the impact on Bitcoin’s security would be serious. At best, the block chain will have a significant fraction of stale or orphaned blocks due to constant forks, making 51% attacks much easier and increasing the transaction confirmation time. At worst, consensus will break down due to block withholding or increasingly aggressive undercutting. This suggests a fundamental rethinking of the role of block rewards in cryptocurrency design. Nakamoto appears to have viewed the block reward as a necessary but temporary evil to achieve an initial allocation of bitcoins in the absence of a central authority, with the transaction fee regime being the ideal, inflation-free steady state of the system. But our work shows that incentivizing compliant miner behavior in the transaction fee regime is a significantly more daunting task than in the block reward regime.”

"Second, the transaction market cannot generate an adequate level of
“mining” income via fees as users free-ride on the fees of other transactions in a block and in the subsequent blockchain. Instead, newly minted bitcoins, known as block rewards, have made up the bulk of mining income to date. Looking ahead, these two limitations imply that liquidity is set to fall dramatically
as these block rewards are phased out. Simple calculations suggest that once block rewards are zero, it
could take months before a Bitcoin payment is final, unless new technologies are deployed to speed up
payment finality. Second-layer solutions such as the Lightning Network might help, but the only
fundamental remedy would be to depart from proof-of-work, which would probably require some form
of social coordination or institutionalisation."

>>20552438
>>20552417
>>20552382
>>20552350
>>20552316
>>20552295
>>20552248
drns.

Analysis. We proceed now with an analysis of the rewards obtained in the transaction fee model by a selfish miner. Parts will look similar to the analysis done in [9]. For every infinitesimally small transaction fee that arrives, we wish to compute the probability that it winds up in a block mined by the selfish miner. Note that if the selfish miner just used default mining instead, this probability would be exactly α. The determining factor in this probability will be the size of the selfish miner’s private chain. To this end, let’s define the following states (same states used in [9]), and we’ll compute this probability separately for each state. • State 0: Everyone agrees on the longest chain — Racingm H = false. • State i > 0: The selfish miner m has a private chain of length i — Privatem = H + i. • State 00 : There are competing blocks of height H, one of which was produced by the selfish miner, and the selfish miner has no private blocks — Racingm H = true and Privatem = H. Let fs denote the probability that a transaction winds up in a block mined by the selfish miner in the eventual longest chain, conditioned on the system being in state s when the transaction is announced. We compute there probabilities below. If we then define ps to be the probability that the system is in state s, we can then observe that the expected fraction of transaction fees claimed by the selfish miner is exactly:

P s fs · ps. Eyal and Sirer [9] have already computed ps for all s. The values for ps are:

P s fs · ps. Eyal and Sirer [9] have already computed ps for all s. The values for ps are:

p0 = 1 − 2α 2α3 − 4α2 + 1 p00 = (1 − α)(α − 2α 2 ) 2α3 − 4α2 + 1 pi = ( α 1 − α ) i−1 α − 2α 2 2α3 − 4α2 + 1 , i > 0 To complete the analysis, we just need to compute fs for each s. Appendix E contains the derivation of fs for all s, which are stated below: f0 = α 2 + α(1 − α) (α + γ(1 − α)). f00 = α. f1 = α + (1 − α)α = α(2 − α). fi = 1 − ((1 − α) i−1 (1 − f0)). Finally, when α ∈ (0, .5) and γ ∈ [0, 1], we show in the Appendix E that the selfish miner’s rewards are given by Reward(α, γ) = 5α 2 − 12α 3 + 9α 4 − 2α 5 + γ(α − 4α 2 + 6α 3 − 5α 4 + 2α 5 ) 2α3 − 4α2 + 1

“SELFISH MINING WITH TRANSACTION FEES: Selfish mining is a deviant strategy first identified by Eyal and Sirer [9]. Essentially, a selfish miner chooses not to release blocks immediately upon being found, instead withholding them in hopes of tricking the rest of the network into wasting their mining power mining blocks that will be orphaned. We find that the selfish mining strategy performs even better in the transaction fees model than the block-reward model. A priori, there’s no reason to expect this. In this section we provide simulation results, along with some intuition and a theoretical analysis proving this. Essentially what winds up happening is that while the selfish miner mines the same fraction of blocks in either reward model, the selfish miner’s blocks will tend to be larger. In the block-reward model, this doesn’t matter because all blocks are worth the same, but in the transaction fees model this means the selfish miner gets greater reward.”

“We have argued that deviant mining strategies in a transactionfee regime could hurt the stability of Bitcoin mining and harm the ecosystem. In a block chain with constant forks caused by undercutting, an attacker’s effective hash power is magnified because he will always mine to extend his own blocks whereas other miners are not unified. This would make a “51%” attack possible with much less than 51% of the hash power. Many other unanticipated side-effects may arise. In the block size debate, it is frequently argued or assumed that space in the block chain will be a scarce resource and a market will emerge, with users being able to speed up the confirmation of a transaction by paying a sufficiently large transaction fee. But if miners intentionally “leave money on the table” when solving blocks, as is the case in undercutting attacks, it breaks this assumption. That is because undercutting miners are not looking to maximize the transaction fee that they can claim, and don’t have a strong reason to prioritize a transaction with a high fee.(9) Put another way, the block size imposes a constraint on the total size of transactions in a block and the threat of being undercut imposes another constraint on the total fee. The two interact in complex ways. We believe that qualitatively our results will continue to hold in a world where the available block size is much smaller than the demand, but quantitatively the impact of undercutting will be mitigated (see end of Section 3.1). Still, it is an important direction for future research to understand this connection more rigorously.

Despite the variety of our results, we believe we have only scratched the surface of what can go wrong in a transactionfee regime. To wit: we have not presented an analysis of miners whose strategy space includes both undercutting and selfish mining, primarily due to the complexity of the resulting models. There has been scant attention paid to the transition to a transaction-fee regime. The Nakamoto paper addresses it briefly: “The incentive can also be funded with transaction fees... Once a predetermined number of coins have entered circulation, the incentive can transition entirely to transaction fees and be completely inflation free” [19]. Similar comments on the Bitcoin Wiki and other places suggest that the community views the transition as unremarkable. Some altcoins (Monero, Dogecoin) have even opted to hasten the block reward halving time. Our results suggest a different view. We see the block reward as integral to the stability of the mining game. At a minimum, analyzing equilibria in the transaction-fee regime appears dramatically harder than in the block-reward regime, which is a cause for concern by itself. The monetary inflation resulting from making the block reward permanent, as Ethereum does, may be a small price to pay to ensure the stability of a cryptocurrency.

this fud poster spamming the thread is a huge buy signal

"Second, the transaction market cannot generate an adequate level of
“mining” income via fees as users free-ride on the fees of other transactions in a block and in the subsequent blockchain. Instead, newly minted bitcoins, known as block rewards, have made up the bulk of mining income to date. Looking ahead, these two limitations imply that liquidity is set to fall dramatically
as these block rewards are phased out. Simple calculations suggest that once block rewards are zero, it
could take months before a Bitcoin payment is final, unless new technologies are deployed to speed up
payment finality. Second-layer solutions such as the Lightning Network might help, but the only
fundamental remedy would be to depart from proof-of-work, which would probably require some form
of social coordination or institutionalisation."

>>20552476
based
>>20552606
ok doomer

>>20552248
>>20552295
>>20552316
>>20552350
>>20552382
>>20552417
>>20552438
>>20552467
>>20552496
>>20552523
>>20552553
>>20552575
You’re an absolute faggot for spamming this pompous bullshit FUD instead of posting a link. Please kys today.

About those BTC trade war :https://twitter.com/molllliy/status/1259109709677654021/photo/1Miner is stockpiling BTC and mining like there is no tomorrow during the monsoon : with the cheapest hydro/nuclear/solar?coal in the world ever 3k$ to produce one BTChttps://twitter.com/molllliy/status/1277145706457776129+ Selling to themself (mining farm pool sell otc are held by central whales exchange (main Asian ones, Binance and friend with benefit 3k to 6k max and then selling to retail and pleb 9k$ to 11k$ max Whales are shareholder & miner via proxy corporation are doing the same selling to the Binance cartel with friends with benefit (who is also are BTC bitcoin miner producer and cash bitcoin SV miner and all main Pow (ETH include but less) and shareholder of all Pos (Tez Cosmos, Algorand, Elrond, Polkadot, etc.)https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/binance#section-investors+ Same but a little bit different with their USA counterpart Western Cartel have a higher production costhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Currency_GroupThe CME boys and Deribit Guy are shorting derivatives future and Option to minimize the Chinese margin due to the Trump trade war with USA China. The offshore burglars paradise paper guys (theter bitfinex gang mafia are played the fed Fed Brr guys by proxy due to there contract with exchange whale for them to pump and dump the market with their fav weapons usdt in total connivance with all the whales,https://coinlib.io/coin/XTZ/Tezos+ Bitmex Arthur are farming and harvesting the clues newcomers) The cryptocurrency mods Reddit and paid Shills are playing innocent guys, meaning all the pro know what is going on and where we are heading. Simple, they are stockpiling resources for the cheapest cost ever making profit high margin on retails. Pumping for FOMO trade when it is needed and recking clueless newbies people by selling dreams

>>20552660
>On the Instability of Bitcoin Without the Block Reward
https://www.cs.princeton.edu/~arvindn/publications/mining_CCS.pdf
The most in-depth paper written on bitcoin EVER
Princeton university

>Beyond the doomsday
economics of “proof-of work” in cryptocurrencies
Monetary and Economic Department
https://www.bis.org/publ/work765.pdf

Simple, they are stockpiling resources for the cheapest cost ever making profit high margin on retails. Pumping for FOMO trade when it is needed and recking clueless newbies people by selling dreams. Or dilute them shareholder network part with multiple and complex strategies like XRP (Spare lock supply by foundations or Dev team) then buying back for a low price when the sp500 crash dump when the top 100 global hedges who fund them decide to take profit and purge the financial system. They pump it again with the news. BTC market cap will only grow up. The price is for the retail and pleb (no offense) The % margin call and network share are for those who control this industry.https://medium.com/tokendaily/rise-of-the-new-crypto-mafias-856e34d2d6e7Those guys control the market with SP500 correlation from production to delivery and repurchase it when they decide to dump and panic sell holder, everybody knows, nobody is naive or candid. So buy low sell high. Indeed, nothing news just business. Not personal. Always be leery of the people who downplay their intelligence. No need to agree or disagree or to share, everybody already knows, only newbies and clueless don't. Don't be emotionally attach to crypto. Please. Be careful. Play your own strategies. Whales hunt newcomers.

-Bitocin censorship
https://medium.com/@johnblocke/r-bitcoin-censorship-revisited-58d5b1bdcd64

Bitcoin BTFO. It should be common knowledge that it has 0 chance of long term success. It´s jsut used as a pump and dump by the whales to make billions. They don´t actually believe in it, but why stop when they´re making so much money.

>>20552257
eh, if btc is at about 45k, its market cap sits at about 1 trillion dollars. MSFT, AMZN, AAPL the biggest companies in the world have that market cap. I have my doubts in the current future it will be that big. but I do believe it will grow significantly over this next decade.\ maybe to a 1 trillion dollar market cap

>>20552254
and every year you dont buy any while it skyrockets in price

>>20552822
First of all, stop rambling out your ass and stroking your own ego. Nobody is reading all of that shit.
Second of all, have you considered the fact that most people here are just trying to make money in the short term and cash out at the next top with the whales?
Arrogant fat fuck. Nobody cares if you think it’s going to 0 in the extreme long term.

God this board is dumb. Why would bitcoin ever have a trillion mcap? It has no tricks left up it´s sleeve. Only bad news will come out on bitcoin in the coming years. It will never scale, its getting more centralized and expensive. You people need to take a hard look in the mirror, and stop bullshiting yourself and others.

>>20552350
>2010 fud
my sides

>>20552220
Me

>>20552822
>>20553051
What do you think will overtake BTC? You seem to know what you're talking about.

>>20553051
But link? Now that's a 10 trillion mcap waiting to happen

>>20552350
>thinking FUD on biz will affect the price
You had 9 years

>>20553033
yes, but the people shilling scams like bitcoin are indulging in highly unmorale activity. Furthermore, bitcoin will have to die for the crypto market to succeed. It´s an oxymoron. If you are pro crypto, you should be anti bitcoin. Simple as that. You fags dont see the bigger picture, bitcoin will never reach ATH again. So, the sooner it dies, the better.

>>20553127
It's not going to die until something can out-price it...something stinky

>>20553088
I don´t give out freebies, but it will take a few more years anyway. The world is not ready for crypto and the scam market needs to be purged first, before something can rise from the ashes.


>>20553061
Some of that is more recent than 2010. Doesn´t matter anyway, it still holds true. It has been mathematically proven that bitcoin will fail. Isn´t that what you blockchain fags like? Mathematics?

>>20553061
Imagine being this much of a faggot. Bitcoin is PUMPING alongside precious metals now. It was crabbing for MONTHS at a stable price level. Muh volatility muh fake internet money. Bet this same faggot spamming this bullshit uses a Visa card for transactions and talks about centralization.

>>20553127
If Bitcoin dies it's over for crypto for a very long time. Literally no one outside of investments circles have even heard the word Ethereum mentioned, let alone any shitcoin with even less of a market cap.

Bitcoin? Even my grandma asked me about it.

>>20552608
Yeah unironically want more BTC and FUND now

>>20552220
In a tight situation? How are you going to make serious money above 100 million without bitcoin?

>>20552248
Congrats anon, some of the dumbest fud ever
>Bitcoin lacks a very good codebase
You have to be a complete retard to not realize Bitcoin has the strongest codebase of any project. Seriously name project that has had more eyes on it or that has a more well understood protocol with a lower attack surface
>is becoming more centralized
Mining industry is booming in the US and we'll be starting to see natural gas flares harvested for it at refineries soon too. China total share of hash is dropping. Meanwhile btc is getting more independent researchers and developer funding from different organizations that ever before. Finally, name a coin with more consensus validating full nodes than btc. Lightning alone has more nodes than most other projects layer 1. You can't even sync an eth node from genesis without it crashing, you need trusted third party to fast sync from.
>lacks innovation
The more innovation you cram into your base layer the more attack surface and riskier it gets. Constant innovation should not be encouraged at the protocol level. Meanwhile lightning is about to get uncorrelated payments with PTLCs, and DLCs allow derivatives and gambling markets right in top of lightning. You also have statechains and newly discovered coinpools using taproot for more layer 2 scaling. Statechains alone are a mindfuck because they let you trade a utxo with minimal trust and it never needs to hit the chain accept in a dispute

>>20553705
>lacks on chain governance
Btc is the only coin with a culture of full nodes are recommend for users which means users take protocol updates seriously and provide a check and balance on miners. PoW game theory also incentives miners to behave
>liquidity will drop over time
Dumbest argument yet. There will never be an exchange or payment service that doesn't accept btc. Liquidity is a snowball effect
>other coins will catch up
Its all tradeoffs on features. Btc is the most safest and most secure ledger in the world. There will always be demand for that
>undercutting and selfish mining strategies will undermine the security
Yeah I read that paper too and its complete bullshit
>miners revenue will drop
Revenue will drop on the minority forks because they have no fee revenue
>and it wastes resources
Energy put to Bitcoin is not a waste by definition, because if it wasn't profitable then nobody would do it

>>20552386
This is what I've been afraid of. 2015-16 felt like eons, hate for it to be even worse this cycle

>>20553705
Everything you wrote is wrong, and you have a narrow knowledge base on the tech and the market. yeez, im too tired today to even spend more time debating tech illiterate brainlets.

>>20552220
Are you planning on dying during the next 18 months?

did mcafee eat his penis or whatever that promise was yet

>>20553887
no he is a scamming faggot, like most of crypto

>>20553792
You mistake crypto by thinking its about tech. There will always be a better tech coming along, you can never escape that. If you recreate money every single time that happens then you never have a strong money.
Crypto is some minimal amount of tech which btc already has, then the other 90% is social contract and trust. Crypto is not a tech revolution, it is a trust revolution

>>20553850
>Accumulate a shit ton of crypto for over 2 years in the bear market.
>Die next summer when it starts going up again.
>Millions of dollars worth of crypto locked away someplace in a wallet.
>Family is all normies. No way they could ever figure out how to access it.
This would be what would happen given my luck.

>>20552220
i take speed so my perception of time makes 6 months feel like 4 months

>>20554045
It´s both, and there needs to be a balance. Bitcoin not having smart contracts will prove to be a huge weakness. You can´t do simple things as double checking transactions, putting spending limits in wallets etc. The social trust of btc is good for now, but it´s only gonna decline when all the moonboys slowly leave. It has been taken over by blockstream and other shady companies. Other cryptos will caatch up, and eventaully be more secure than btc. My head hurts today, and ive written about this many times before, so cant bother going into the nitty gritty.
There have been several bugs related to bitcoin as explained above, and the code is good, but not great and future proof.

>>20552220
this comment unironically sums up /biz/ some people genuinely think like this

>>20552248
how many fucking years are you faggots gonna keep saying this for seriously

>>20554353
until it comes true, and it will soon. You really think bitcoin will be here for the next 100 years don´t you? hahhaha

>>20554289
Btc will have futures, options, swaps, etc in lightning through DLCs once schnorr is merged. This will drive liquidity into lightning because right now it can only do payments and let's face it nobody gives a shit about that, they want to gamble. That's the whole reason defi is exploding with wrapped btc. Segwit also allows easy script upgrades so a more general purpose smart contract script is just a soft fork away and would be extremely safe since it would be isolated to a segwit output. There is tons of research out there on general purpose scripts for btc that enable smart contracts but that are mathematically provable instead of this turing complete crap that just create bugs.
Btc gets the most attention and therefore will continue to improve. Your bet is that a new project that nobody except a handle of devs understand is going to overthrow something that has every serious cryptographer studying it. Not likely to happen

>>20554735
oh my god shut up

>>20552248
You are talking about 10++ years down the line, if ever. Being "right" is a lot about timing. If it takes a decade to be right, you are wrong.

>>20552254
I mean we were in the longest bull run in history of which 2013 was a part of so

>>20553705
>he still believes in LN hopium in 2017+3
LN is the biggest cope out there, 0 liquidity years after its launch, doesn't work half the time and has a god awful ux.
How will you fags cope when fees will be $30 again to have a tx processed in half a day?

>>20554752
Dude, on chain is what matters. Lightning transactions are not bitcoin blockchain transactions. As posted in one of my posts above, off chain transaction are super bad for the main chain. This is a no brainer, as no one will be left using the main chain in the end

>>20555019
0 liquidity because nobody actually wants crypto for payments. This is the biggest misconception that all the bcashers believe. Wait until you can go leverage long/short on lightning and watch liquidity explode. Also lightning works great these days and has a great UX, your post is just proof you haven't tried it within the last 1.5 years

>>20552295
supply cut is bearish. wow, what a fuckin idiot.
ever heard of supply and demand? go back to school u giant retard or kys!

>>20555257
On chain doesn't scale to the world dumbass, and lightning is an on chain 2 of 2 multisig. It's literally a contract on the blockchain redeemable to a single address unilaterally without consent of the other party. Putting every single transaction on a database that has to reach global consensus is how you destroy the only thing that makes Bitcoin valuable in the first place because you centralize the fuck out of it, and Zuckerberg can still just come along and beat your TPS anyway with a central mysql database running on AWS. All you've did is force Bitcoin to compete at something that blockchains are inherently bad at and sacrificed the things they are good at.

>>20552248
kys!

>>20552220
I know youre joking, but with airborne flu-rabies flying around it makes escaping wageslavery very time critical..

>>20555257
People will still use the main chain for opening and closing channels, loop in loop out, atomic swaps, coinjoins, multisig cold storage, etc. Lightning just moves coffee payments to another layer where you don't need fees. All this other shit will pay fees to miners. Its really not complicated at all

>>20553088
>>20553198
don't encourage shills. neets keep spamming RLC as bitcoin replacement. but it's garbage. bitcoin has already entered public consciousness as digital gold, store of value, etc. anything that comes after will be looked at as a copycat and ingenuine.

the only reason we accept gold as a store of value is because it came first, and it's always been that way. same with bitcoin.

>>20552138
the highest ROI will probably be CAP, as it's very low market cap right now

all the big CT dumbasses are accumulating right now, but haven't started shilling it yet

proof here:
>>20554954
>>20554954

>>20556504
oh look, a targeted p-d campaign complete with reassembled memes from discord.

it's so obviously fucking formulaic at this point. piss off pajeet.

>>20552138
Btc at 200k would mean 20 to 30 $ per rsr

Gonna make it

>>20556828
RSR holders really are retarded. Reminds me of XRP faggots waiting for 589

>>20552248
Just tell us what coin your shilling instead of posting all this shit..

>>20552220
Not a poor person like me
Oh well, Cost Average it is then.

>>20554243
Literally the opposite.

>>20557204
oh yeah?

>>20552248
What the hell? I hate bitcoin now.
I'm going to give my bitcoins away immediately, they are so dirty and crap, if I sell them even the money I get for them will be disgusting and unusable!