/biz/ - Business & Finance

>muh forks

>>4145550
Because we already all know about it.

>>4145550
because it's a centralized piece of shit with a community full of nothing but FUDers and shills. The fork is supposed to be an attempt at fixing the shit show that is the EDA. Only thing that's keeping this shit afloat is Bitcoin in its branding and the logo.

>>4145642
The only thing actually keeping it afloat is the complete disaster that is blockstream and the core community.

No we don't; I wanted to ask the same question here.

Wtf, why don't they wait until core/2x fork and try to gain traction during the inevitable confusion. Seems like they are looking for a way to outsmart everyone else, but they may ne outsmarting themselves in the very end.

>>4145745
Because they are supporting the 2x fork and using it in an attempt to steal as many miners as possible away from core. It's a coordinated effort to attack BTC. That's why they rely on FUDers and shills like this moron >>4145656 to be effective.

>>4145823
>hey we need a scaling solution now
>k we universally agreed on a bigger blocksize years ago
>*blockstream enters the room*
>NO NO NO NO THAT'S A BANDAID FIX TO A LARGER PROBLEM
>WE NEED SEGWIT AND AN OFFCHAIN SCALING SOLUTION
>ok how long will that take?
>ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF ATLEAST
>ok but we need one now how about a 2x blocksize increase in the meantime?
>OK
>*segwit gets activated*
>#NOS2X
kkk

>>4146021
We don't need scaling. We aren't going to centralize the network so niggers like you can afford transactions.

>>4146021
>kkk
I was agreeing until you wrote this racist trash for no fucking reason. Just wow. Fuck off back to \pol\ you white idiot.

>>4146021
Literally fabricated

>>4146210

you dumb fuck lol. its the same miners either way. its not like segwit coin magically decentralizes mining, the same dusty warehouses full of chink miners will be there as before

>>4146210
The network has been centralized for ages you stupid faggot. All your doing is moving control from one group that is incentivized to have a functional running network. To another group that has complete development control and is incentivized to gimp bitcoin so they can profit from offchain solutions and LN

>>4146237
We have the history to show this is true.

How does removing EDA make BCC mining more competitive though? Is it because the difficulty can be manipulated with EDA?

>>4146252
Lurk more faggot.

>>4146483

Because it's colossally retarded and leads to periods of 1 block every 6 hours, to 50 blocks an hour which fucks with the inflation which means it would become permanently unprofitable next halving.

The subnormal fudders were hailing it as "genius" and that it would "kill BTC" so take that on board when you read them.

>>4145550
Is it actually forking into a new coin or just getting an update?

>>4147112
It's an update fork.

>>4147157
So new coin?

>>4147171
yes. bitcoin cash cash

With the shackles of the arbitrary 1 MB block size cap, RBF and SegWit cancer removed, also BlockStream/Core toxicity behind us there is nowhere to go but up. Merchants that were previously supporting Legacy Bitcoin will only have to tweak their software to now support the surviving Bitcoin Cash chain which will increase adoption of the new chain dramatically with minimal effort.

>>4147841
>lets remove 21 million coin limit, it's arbitrary anyway

>>4147841
> unironically fork to 1GB blocks every 1 minute pls

this anon was right

>>4114533

>>4149205
wring pic

>>4145550
So does this mean you can split your previously split coins again?

What about this anon