/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>57577102
And no, BTC as savings and BCH as checking is not happening.
BCH can support the entire range of transactions from $0.01 up to millions of dollars at low fees, while BTC can only support a limited range of transactions starting at $100+ due to fees being regularly $5+ (5% of $100, this is Visa levels of usury).
BCH is useful both to spend (any size) and save, while BTC is only useful to spend (moderate - large transactions) and save (moderate - large amounts).
Therefore, individuals that balance their accounts between BTC and BCH will increasingly find that they have no need for BTC and transferring between it and BCH is an expensive hassle that adds no extra utility compared to just holding and spending everything in BCH.

>>57577108
Bitcoin is digital gold

>>57577148
Then Bitcoin Cash is digital gold that you can send to anyone, anytime, for less than a penny.

>>57577108
>he doesn’t get it and probably never will

>>57577102
Bitcoin already failed, it's nothing more than just another inflated FED toy and will never be a real currency adopted by the people of the world that actually need a truly decentralized, trustless, immutable currency. Everything Bitcoin promised to be it fails to deliver, that's when the "digital gold" nonsense started.

Kek. Every second of every day BTC's lead in network effect grows, stay poor shitcoiner

>>57577190
You have become complacent

>>57577184
Currency is a vulgar base use-case that has always been relegated to poor monies like silver (the OG shitcoin), BTC does not need nor even benefit from use as common currency, all that matters is the systemic economic state information encoded in the price

>>57577200
Check the chart, shitcoiner. A buyer of Store of Value does not care if the asset can be used as p2p paypal, they care that it has the largest network of use as a SoV.

>>57577237
Your welcome to believe as you like, but that network effect is built on a weak foundation.

>>57577102
I’m not selling.

>>57577276
You mean the strongest foundation

>>57577102
a lot of people are going to lose a lot of money by the time they realize this

>>57577108
I think a lot of people miss this point. Gold was absolutely money, silver was also used because it was useful for smaller denominations. Bitcoin (any of them) are infinitely divisible, silver not needed. Monetary function very much needed.
Otherwise we all might as well be buying beanie babies.

>>57577102
yeah I'm sure that's all fine and dandy but it will actually fail for one reason
>it was designed to

BTC 100k by summer 2024

>>57577102
all of this well-reasoned BCH shilling is really starting to piss me off
IM NOT DONE BUYING YET FUCKERS

>>57577102
so much yapping about censorship but not a single word about why bigger blocks wont lead to centralization

and no the current block size of BCH (which keeps up wit muh Moore's law...right??) does not allow it to scale anywhere near enough

To actually scale through block size you'd need BSV sizes and we all saw where that went, they had to resort to twitter to point out the real chain because slow propagation between nodes caused too many forks and orphan chains

If you'd actually have a brain like you're pretending to have you'd be buying Kaspa.
Nuff said.

>>57577102
If bch had the traffic of BTC it would be an usable piece of shit, kys tech illiterate bcash cuck from 2017

One word to prove you're a gigantic monkey: you don't need rbf to attempt a double spend. Moron kys

>>57579531
The security of instant transactions on BCH has been upgraded with extra technology called Double Spend Proofs. The highest potential for fraud occurs in the first couple of seconds after a transaction is sent as it propagates around the network to all BCH nodes and miners. Network nodes that receive conflicting transactions (in this initial high-risk window, or at any time) indicating a potential fraud attempt which publishes a cryptographically verifiable alert to the rest of the node network.

On the other hand RBF makes it trivially easy to perform on the segwit chains, and is economically viable for any purchase less than the cost of the fee required to perform the double spend.

>>57579525
You have a fundamental lack of understanding of Bitcoin's design. It is not essential to store all transaction data forever.

The relevant information for a blockchain is the UTXO set. Even if no other historical data is available, the fundamental properties of Bitcoin - such as the 21 million coin supply limit, ability to validate new transations or process smart contracts - is preserved within only the UTXO data. While the UTXO set size does grow over time, as coins distribute to more holders over more outputs, it grows far more slowly than the cumulative data of every transaction because it is required to destroy one or more UTXOs in order to create fresh ones. Even much of the UTXO set is not required to be readily available to nodes. For example, Satoshi's coins from 2009 to 2011 that have not moved in over a decade will need to be available forever in case of his return, but they do not need to be available in immediate node memory. They can be retrieved from slower storage in the unlikely event they do reactivate. The same is true of large numbers of other old, inactive or burnt UTXOs.

This opens an enormous opportunity for space saving. As explained in the whitepaper, spent transactions of sufficient age can be deleted.
nodes will operate in two different capacities, pruned nodes & archival nodes. Full copies of all blockchain data ever will still be available from archival nodes. However these archival nodes will be a specialised service offered according to market demand for analytics & historical insight. There will certainly be interest in such cryptocurrency data, even at its small size today there are many companies in the cryptocurrency industry specialising in such data (e.g. Dune Analytics, Glassnode, Coinmetrics), but even in the worst case where there was no archival nodes & only pruned nodes Bitcoin can function perfectly well and would not be compromised.

>>57579606
This can be done by any payment processing system like Satoshi explained in the snack machine thread, and it's mostly useless because miners will always mine a transaction with higher fees/vbytes because logic, kys monkey

>>57577102
Didn't read. Just more normie trash from normies. Baby's first month in crypto
kys, midwit

>>57579689
It is essential to keep all the data to validate everything and also for proof of existence and data stored in the Blockchain. Anyone saying otherwise is a parasite that will fail in his manipulation because it only works on literal monkeys

>>57577102
I will say something bad about bitcoin even though I'm pretty bullish on bitcoin right now. The lightning network has a huge fraction of just bait and ponzi activity compared to legitimate activity and the design is just shitty. In addition bitcoin nodes don't get paid a single penny even though the blockchain requires a 1TB SSD. Lightning nodes can make money in theory but in practice the vast majority can't make money even if they are contributing meaningfully. Anybody who's just passing data around gets paid literally nothing ever even though the hardware requirements are fairly intense for a full lightning node.

Is this really the best that some of the bitcoin community could come up with for layer 2

>>57579742
>he doesn't know about the first seen policy
ngmi

>>57579759
that's what archival nodes are for

>>57577155
thats because BCH is worth less than a penny

>>57577108
>>57579606
right, and this is all on a chain with a capacity of 100 TPS. not even 4x that of ETH. in the situation you describe in which it's used for small payments on a large scale, BCH fees will spike to ETH gas levels or worse rendering it inefficient for p2p payments.

I'm not trying to FUD or put anyone down here, it's not a bad coin or anything, i'm just trying to point out the fact that at 100 TPS it's not going to be adopted like you say. if your response is going to be that upgrades are in the works or something along those lines, it's hard to forsee why BCH would be adopted over any of the many other existing chains that can already handle more than 100 TPS. it just doesn't make sense

>>57577102
You had my attention until BCash was mentioned...

>>57579735
You should do a double spend on BCH then and show the world kek
>>57579851
ABLA is being added in May this year, look it up.

>>57579780
I know how to read charts. That's all I give a shit about
die poor

>>57579867
For the lazy retards, ABLA is the Adaptive Blocksize Limit Algorithm. Starting from a guaranteed minimum of 32 MBs & with no upper bound, it will increase or decrease blocksizes according to real network traffic (observed blocksizes). The maximum continual increase is 2x per year if all blocks are 100% full, but under realistic conditions this is unlikely. However ABLA also has a bonus amount of surge capacity which allows blocks to increase up to 4x in a year IF following a lengthy period without increases.

>>57579981
would that not result in >>57579525
>To actually scale through block size you'd need BSV sizes and we all saw where that went, they had to resort to twitter to point out the real chain because slow propagation between nodes caused too many forks and orphan chains
?

>>57580084
That's the case for BSV because of bandwidth limitations today. VISA level demand isn't going to happen in a day, it will take years. Internet infrastructure will be improving that entire time. You can even see Satoshi address this in picrel here >>57579867
There needs to be a blocksize cap so node operators have some idea of what to scale to. Making it algorithmic accomplishes that, and eliminates a 2nd blocksize war possibility within BCH. It's good stuff.

>>57580124
damn that's actually pretty smart

>>57577102
no one cares if BTC will fail or not. Pandora's box is open and if bitcoin goes to 0 something else will take its place.

i couldnt give a flying fuck if btc does well or not it is the open source technology that matters at this point.

>>57579867
No one cares about bch except newfags and mentally ill monkeys, I was just explaining how that talking point was extremely retarded

>>57580723
BTC is the normie coin
that's what newfags are attracted to

>>57577102
Learn about the network effect and why you are losing money since 2017.

>The nice thing about BCH is it's ready to be used in the real world today. No second layer needed. Consumers and merchants can accept it and send it directly to one another instantly (no RBF) without really any financial overhead.

BCH can't scale to mass adoption you clueless fool.

>>57581175
>BCH can't scale to mass adoption
As usual, no technical reasoning has been included with that statement.

A Bitcoin transaction is an internally encapsulated logical unit. Each individual transaction can be validated and processed using only its own transaction inputs and outputs. No reference to simultaneous activity of other transactions is required. Another way of thinking about this is that Bitcoin is sharded at the level of each transaction. This gives Bitcoin the property of being embarassingly parallel, a computer science designation for software that is easy to spread across multiple processors.

Innovation and development in hardware (bandwidth, storage, processing power, cost, etc) is ever increasing and has been for decades. Bitcoin was designed for this environment, and BCH of course benefits from that by retaining the original on-chain scaling strategy. In this way, the entire computer hardware industry pushes forward BCH scaling with zero effort or resources expended by the BCH community themselves. Global adoption is not going to happen overnight, so in the intervening period much of the scaling issue solves itself simply by ongoing technology improvement.

Lastly, you can learn about pruned nodes here >>57579689

>>57577102
stealth bch shill thread!
I would have posted earlier but I was b&

>>57577102
Institutions will push all the normies who never bought BTC to buy it. They will sell it as "the money of the future" once they pumped all of their liquidity in.

>>57581510
Yes, it's a bubble that only has staying power so long as there exists greater fools to keep feeding it.

>>57579689
ok? Not only did I know all of that, it also had nothing to do with what I said.
Filtered.

>>57581628
Maybe you can clarify why you think bigger blocks will lead to centralization, because pruned nodes address the largest concerns I've heard of it.

bagholder thread
wise in french in options field + filtered

>>57581527
Burying your head in the sand, nice.

>>57581758
meant for >>57581712

>>57577108

The fact your mentioning this means the dollar about to collapse. We going digital whether you like it or not. The current fiat system is going the ways of the VHS/DVD.

>>57577159
>the 'getting it' part is where we have to accept Jews as permanent middle men who control our money.

>>57577102
>Why BTC will fail

>>57577155
OP in pic

>>57577102
Stopped reading as soon as you started shilling a BTC alternative.

>>57581887
>>57581897
>>57581900
Always nice to see the excellent arguments for small blocks

>>57581900
>Stopped reading as soon as you started shilling a BTC alternative.
BASED

>>57581916
>reeeeeeeeeeee
it was discussed million times
fuck off noob

>>57582095
Were the discussions always like this? Just a few reasons would be nice, all you've done is post memes

>>57582148
>Were the discussions always like this?
Yeah, pretty much

>>57582148
>recap? I can't use google.
ok.:

1)
>I need to buy my daily coacola can ON THE BLOCKCHAIN, it it MUST BE recorded in the GLOBAL LEDGER for all humanity to know FOREVER that I buy cola can each day every day!!!
why, idiot?
instead use layer 2 solutions
>no, because reasons!!!11111

2)
>I want big blocks omg!!!
they will make miners more centralised and push them to one location or to SPV, since it takes precious milliseconds, or even seconds, longer, to mine non-empty block since we have additional 4.. 8.. 16(bitch-cash?).. 128(bitcoin scam vision CSW) MB more to check each time (download, check crypto, check with UTXO and consensus rules).
this translates to growing portion of your income as miner

3)
>BUT I WANT MY BIG BLOCKS!!!!!!!!!
initial download will take weeks or even months instead days
more and more people will "not bother" and use SPV instead real wallet node
that is insecure in long run

>>57577102
PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW PoW

GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE

Try to ignore this motherfucker

>>57582234
>Use layer 2
Why use layer 2 if layer 1 works though?

>Propagation takes longer and it's more expensive (I think?)
Internet bandwidth has gotten much better since 1MB was the standard and wouldn't all the fees from the additional transactions offset the costs?

>You need to be running a non-mining node
Isn't Bitcoin designed to let users just be users? As far as I understand, it's the miners securing the network, not the random read-only nodes. What can a read-only node even do in terms of preventing fraud? Seems like as soon as it did anything different than the miners it will have just forked itself off the network.
I saw in another thread they (BCH) we're doing UTXO commitments to solve the initial block download being super large.

>>57577102
bitcoin clones like bitcoin cash and litecoin will always be background cryptos that are good for sending money BUT
for bitcoin cash and litecoin to survive in the long term they should never get too popular or else they will become as clogged as bitcoin.

>>57582352
>>Use layer 2
>Why use layer 2 if layer 1 works though?
because the reasons why we need small layer 1 that I just mentioned:

>>Propagation takes longer and it's more expensive (I think?)
>Internet bandwidth has gotten much better since 1MB was the standard and wouldn't all the fees from the additional transactions offset the costs?
no they will not
you would need like 200-1000+ MB bocks to have 1% of humanity doing all stuff on blockchain layer1 like idiots

>>You need to be running a non-mining node
>Isn't Bitcoin designed to let users just be users?
no

>As far as I understand, it's the miners securing the network, not the random read-only nodes.
wrong


>What can a read-only node even do in terms of preventing fraud?
check all transactions since 2009 till today.

>Seems like as soon as it did anything different than the miners it will have just forked itself off the network.
nope, you will take all the SPV-using idiots along with you, and you just above argued most/all users instead miners should be these guys.
(he will still not get it, I bet)

>I saw in another thread they (BCH) we're doing UTXO commitments to solve
it doesn't solve it

you are really dumb and unwilling to learn the same thing
if you need further education it will be 100$ per hour, payable in BTC.
or just google it

>>57582451
What about the ABLA stuff? If the BCH blocks get full, they just get bigger until they aren't. Seems like it solves it.

>>57582462
You're right, that doesn't make any sense and I don't get it.

>>57582477
well, then it will become like BSV after a while? who would want that?

>>57582546
I would guess all the people using it everyday

bumping at 50k

I guess the etfs buying 4% of the total BTC supply in a month was wrong. They're wrong. Everyone is wrong except you OP. You're a special boy.

>>57582601
I argued they are and will continue buying BTC, but that BCH will also grow until it reaches critical mass

>>57582555
vsb or bitcoin cash?

just let it go, BTC won, end of story.

there are countless other solutions for sending money.
I used LTC the other day, I often use USDT over TRX. its cheap and supported.
heck I could even use fucking ripple if I had to.

>>57582638
actually, ripple is almost never supported.
if you want to send money its LTC or USDT(TRC-20)

>>57582638
>Just let it go
Reading this thread and seeing some of the development BCH has done seems pretty good and it seems like it has a lot going for it
There's a lot of fud posting about it too it makes me kind of bullish

>>57582670
well, they do have a halving in 2024 I think. at least they've got that going for them

>>57582670
you should take care about being a contrarian.
sometimes fud is actually warranted.

do you see alot of fud about BTC? no
do you see alot of fud about LINK or ETH?
no
look at their prices. they are growing.

do you see alot of fud about XRP? sure. BCH? yeah. BSV? the crypto with that homosexual? yes

well, look at those coins and where they are.
9 out of 10 coins never surpass BTC in satoshi value. most altcoins are not worth holding thats an undeniable fact.

>>57582820
>you should take care about being a contrarian
this is actually good advice
the thing with BCH fud though is it's all memes and shitposts. Nothing fundamentally bearish.
occasionally you get posters like >>57582462 who will attempt to make an argument, but they really don't understand the topic well enough to continue further.

>>57582866
bitcoin cash never did anything wrong.
just too bad its called Bitcoin Cash.
it will always be the little brother of Bitcoin. maybe thats a good thing. but really, unless they do something different than any other bitcoin clone with bigger blocks, they will never be taken seriously.

oldfags will remember Bitcoin Gold and Bitcoin Diamond.

>>57582866
they've got the CashTokens stuff now, nobody else is doing anything like that with UTXOs as far as I'm aware. we'll see how it plays out.

>>57582917
cash tokens are legit

>>57577102
Come and take it, faggot.

>>57583139
>Crap id
>shitpost
jej

>>57577102
I never understood why anyone wanted the etfs

>>57582820

There is a metric fuckton of fud around LINK going back to 2017 on this board, wtf are you talking about

>>57583776
/biz/ has been bullish on link since it appeared. what are you talking about?

i was about to sell this fake pump but then i saw this thread. i did not sell. i did not read

>bcash baggies having to astroturf this desperately
you'll be taken seriously when you stop trying to appropriate bitcoin like a nigger dying their hair blonde

>>57579735
This can't be done on a payment system with rbf

>>57583967
haven't they already stopped appropriating the brand?
BTC store of value
BCH p2p cash
it's not that confusing
sure it has bitcoin in the name but it also has the genesis block so I get it tobeho

>>57583949
Link is for pedos

>>57577102
I'm unironically bullish on bch because of picrel

>>57582638
Why do you dislike BCH but like LTC? Is it political or technical?

$50k BCH is programmed

>>57577155
BitCoin SV is the real Bcash

>>57585134
BSV is 3 guys in a trenchcoat

>>57584978
because i've seen litecoin being accepted more often for buying stuff.
other than that, they are the same to me. old bitcoin clones (which work no problem there).
they are both good for transactions but considering that someone gets litecoin to give it to a merchant who will then sell it, there is no reason for either of them to pump.
they do accomplish the goal of being used for transactions though.

>>57585683
Merchants could use the hedge feature in BCH Bull and possibly earn interest instead of selling into a stablecoin

>>57585755
i guess they could. they could also just get cash because they have to pay for real stuff elsewhere

>>57585134
Fuck off Craig no one cares about your dead shitcoin

>Why BTC will fail
In fact, there is no need to even explain anything here, everything is already obvious.

>>57585755
in any case, the old school cryptos have proven their worth and they would be the perfect alternative to paypal if they werent so volatile.
so, now instead of keeping your money in coins because they are too risky, you sell your coins for cash or you get USDT which is an even better alternative to paypal. unfortunately, its based on the dollar and unfortunately, its what you need in order to have something stable right now.

merchants will not risk their business because of politics or you would have seen mass merchant adoption of crypto already in 2013.
its hard enough as it is to run a business

>>57577102
>muh BTC as currency
install monero
>BCH
>in 2020+4
Those bags are heavy huh?
>>57580124
>There needs to be a blocksize cap so node operators have some idea of what to scale to. Making it algorithmic accomplishes that, and eliminates a 2nd blocksize war possibility within BCH.
Monero already has this.

>>57585881
what if tho the third top is hidden by FTX fuckery and basically a global recession? what if it would have been a blow off top around $250k

>>57586006
Nice as monero is I don't believ it can fulfill the global currency role. People don't care enough about privacy, and although government can't stop cryptocurrency, they can choose where to distribute their efforts to slow it down. So far, they have placed inordinate amount of resources against Monero. The obfuscation also makes pruning impossible, and no DeFi is disappointing as a lot of regular uses of cash can be replicated with crypto this way.

>>57577221
b-b-b-but mah tps

>>57586150
the biggest issue is it doesn't scale for shit.
bitcoin at least has script and can do L2s. monero is just L1 and 10x more heavy to start with.

>>57577102
>>57577108
>>57577148
>>57577155
>>57577159
>>57577155
>>57577159
>>57577184
>>57577190
>>57577200
>>57577221
>>57577237
>>57577276
>>57577302
>>57577318
>>57577353
>>57577454
>>57577502
>>57577778
>>57579504
>>57579525
>>57579531
>>57579606
>>57579689
>>57579735
>>57579742
>>57579759
>>57579776
>>57579780
>>57579807
>>57579851
>>57579862
>>57579867
>>57579935
>>57579981
>>57580084
>>57580124
>>57580368
>>57580597
>>57580723
>>57580916
>>57581175
>>57581346
>>57581411
>>57581510
>>57581527
>>57581628
>>57581691
>>57581712
>>57581758
>>57581767
>>57581874
>>57581883
>>57581887
>>57581897
>>57581900
>>57581916
>>57582095
>>57582148
>>57582173
>>57582234
>>57582344
>>57582352
>>57582451
>>57582462
>>57582477
>>57582509
>>57582546
>>57582555
>>57582581
>>57582601
>>57582638
>>57582666
>>57582670
>>57582717
>>57582820
>>57582866
>>57582905
>>57582917
>>57583120
>>57583139
>>57583156
>>57583479
>>57583776
>>57583949
>>57583959
>>57583967
>>57584161
>>57584347
>>57584482
>>57584696
>>57584978
>>57585121
>>57585134
>>57585496
>>57585683
>>57585755
>>57585803
>>57585877
>>57585881
50,000 united states dollars, cope seethe and fucking dilate

>>57586188
>L2s
reminder wallet of satoshi is custodial, the only channels that will ever have any liquidity will all be custodial. it's a fucking trap to steal your corn.

>>57586355
nobody can stop you from using a custodial wallet if you choose to be retarded. but there are like 40 non-custodial bitcoin wallets half of hem do LN.

>>57586355
Ignoring all the exponential time space complexity issues with routing, how does blockstream intend to make lightning onboarding possible? lightning's own whitepaper suggests 133MB blocks are required to support 7 billion people and we're already at 8.1 billion. they refused to even do the segwit2x upgrade.

>>57586492
>exponential time space complexity issues with routing

that's retarded. finding the optimal route is not necessary for LN to work. best effort routing is pretty close to logarithmic complexity.

>how does blockstream intend to make lightning onboarding possible?

they don't those fuckers are trying to prevent scaling bitcoin at all costs while shilling that garbage liquid that has like 5 users tops.

>>57586538
>they don't
that's a shame

>>57586974
it's not like they have much say. out of like a 1000 bitcoin devs they got like 4-6? they are tiny. they also make basically no revenue just setting investor money on fire. it's a weird operation.

>>57586492
Yeah, no increase right now. Stupid monkey

>>57586974
Typical tech illiterate gorilla

>>57587035

>>57586150
I think monero is its own thing and that's ok
there is a main stream track and alternate track no one can regulate which is monero
you never know, if the world keeps going real bad, there could be a time when monero properties are required for common people, not just darknet markets

>>57577102
BCH will moon

>>57577102
just bought a bag only because a flippening would be hilarious

>>57577148
No ones going to hold onto it LITERALLY everyone is waiting to sell at the top

>>57588031
Based

>>57577102
I've always wondered if a future Bitcoin Cash run could be a black swan event for Bitcoin. I guess the ETF cycle is as good a time as any.

>>57577102

(((you)))

>>57583776
You should buy LINK now

>>57589957
Ok I just bought the top

>>57577102
I love bitcoin and will never sell it.. Never i rather live from the interests if ever possbile rather than sell my lovely precious btc.

>>57591157
what's the point of owning it if you're not going to sell it?

>>57591703
To own bitcoin.

>>57591705
it doesn't do anything though

>>57591770
It does for me. I also let people pay me in bitcoin if they want for my work.

>>57591796
>it does for me
like what?

>>57591831
I am not going to spoonfeed you if you are unable to see why some people value bitcoin more than fiat. I doubt you have the mental capacity to understand my reasoning. All i say is that i like my freedom.

>>57592252
I don't need to be spoonfed
but the fact you can't even explain your reasoning is enough for me

>>57577108
easy solution: use eth instead
subcent fees are accessible on rollups which will inherit full mainnet security soon enough
1 universal asset, with usage fees outpacing emissions, and better economic security than bitcoin
it's a no brainer, even if the nobrained with heavy bags refuse to see it

>>57592333
I don't have to explain it either.

>>57592373
>better economic security than Bitcoin
bold statement to make
you need billions of dollars of real physical infrastructure to even attempt a 51% on Bitcoin
the US govt could print enough money in a week to buy 51% of the eth supply

>>57592333
Checked
The single minded store of value line of thinking is an unsustainable one