/biz/ - Business & Finance

>mfw

>>7267910
As the creator of the other thread I will just say you probably won't get far. It's hard to get this board to acknowledge the existence of Bitcoin Cash and if they do they almost only can ever say "BCash, BTrash, Cashie, etc." Plus the topics covered in those threads are above the knowledge levels of basically everyone on this board. Good luck mate, but that last one the Segwit supporters did very poorly so I would be surprised if they respond at all. If they could get mods to censor this thread they would, they even asked for it in the last thread. The Segwit supporters don't want to talk, they want you to buy their bags.

Daily reminder that Rodger Ver smirkingly read a script to mt. gox investors that was full of lies and they proceeded to lose hundreds of millions based on him. Ignore bcash posters. Do not reply to bcash threads. Sage bcash threads.

>>7268193
I already told you for this exact same copy/paste post you put in your last thread that Mt. Gox did have access to the coins when Ver was there. It's just that the attackers did as well. So Roger wasn't lying, he just didn't know that Jed McCaleb was too stupid to encrypt the wallet file in the early days of Mt. Gox.

but seriously we need a bigger crash to kill off these shit coins. dotcom style

the weak shouldfearthestrong.jpeg

>>7268273
That's actually why I'm so excited about this crash. Two reasons. First is BCH will be cheap in terms of fiat where even people who work at McDonald's could buy one. Second is that BCH is adding smart contracts and privacy features which makes a lot of alt-coins have no purpose or value. Next bull market is BCH's for sure.

>>7268313
Delusional cashie.

>>7268179
Thank you for creating the other thread. I agree with you. It's so hard to argue with them and it's not even worth.

https://news.bitcoin.com/coingeek-announces-funding-the-electron-cash-development-team/ this one might be real folks

Honestly I think Bitcoin Cash would have performed much better if it weren't for Roger Ver

He is a total embarrassment and has done more harm to BCH's cause than "corecucks" FUD

Someone please answer this for me.
Anon was talking about segwit being cracked or gamed or something.

"Well I have to say if this is the case, "Unlikely" means it will definitely happen. Especially when there is 400 million just sitting there waiting to be taken. If there is the REMOTEST possibility it will happen 100% for sure.

So let's say that is the case. The public will learn that 400 million Bitcoin where stolen from the blockchain.
That's it for crypto as a whole. it's all over 100%
No one will ever trust any code ever again. The public will never invest in ANY coin. Not BCH, Not ETH, not anything at all that isn't back by the power of the government.
So I have to ask myself. What is the purpose of BCH pushing this narrative ? It makes no sense at all on any level.

You think if BCH is right and bitcoin fails because everyone with a segwit address gets BTFO, that everyone will just flock to BCH ?

Yeah no, that would be the end of all blockchain for a generation.

Instead of fudding you better be helping Bitcoin find a solution for the BTC chain instead of shilling BCH."

>>7268313
>cheap
>smart contracts
>privacy features

byteball, I told you. it's faster and cheaper and has smart contracts.

take it as your true-bitcoin-which-is-useful then if it makes sense in value of bitcoin.
you just don't understand the idea of bitcoin.

lol.

>>7268416
>falling for the DAG meme
no thank you

Hope farmers make 51% attack on bch and it's finally over.
tired.

>>7268386
>Instead of fudding you better be helping Bitcoin find a solution for the BTC chain instead of shilling BCH
Cashies don't care, they are willing to burn down 99% of other cryptos if there was even 1% chance of their shitcoin going 2x

true crabs in a bucket mentality

>>7268473
>falling for bcash-is-easy-to-use meme

I could use monero for privacy reasons and speed.
it's pow just like you want.

>>7268371
Why don't you say the same shit about Greg Maxwell or Luke Jr? They are way worse than Ver

And bitcoin cash has way bore leading figures than buttcoin

>>7268386
We already had the solution: bigger blocks
But bitcoin core cucks don't want that because it fucks up their business fee model

>>7268371
Yes and no. Yes, Roger Ver caused some troubles with its attitude but honestly, I would do the same if I was him. It's better to be trashtalked than when nobody talks about you. Same with coins. He knows the technology behind BTC just as we do and he invested hard. He's just a businessman. And he loves media. That's it.
But yeah, it would be better if the Winklevoss twins said something about BCH. I get your point.

>>7268252
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UP1YsMlrfF0

This kills the verpuppets

>>7268252
"Attackers" lol, it's obvious in retrospect that Karpeles let Ver withdraw while everyone else was locked out in return for reading his script. Ver was behind classic, unlimited, xt, etc., and obviously just wants to be in control. Now that he has his own failing fork, all he can do is talk about BTC.

>>7268553
your bch is still SLOW. it's slower than ltc, doge, monero, slower than most alts.
and fees are low because people don't use it.

I don't mind if btc makes blocks bigger if it helps for a while but it's not that important.

you're making drama like if slowness was something death-important for btc to stay btc.

as said, then ltc would kill btc 6 years ago being faster.

Here we go again...

>>7268520
applies to most alt holders talking shit about btc, too

Bitcoin Cash is fine

It's cheap to use and is better secured than other forks.

I don't get why you would hate it. It's cheap.

>>7268520
I am just trying to understand if there is any truth that BTC segwit could be spent by miners like they are fudding, because if it's true, BCH don't win. Everyone loses.
They can't believe that if segwit fails and a billion dollars goes missing , that somehow benefits BCH..

that's delusional. Of course bitcoin would immediately be hard forked back to before the stolen segwit occurred, ala the ETH DAO debacle.

Their arguments make zero sense.

>>7268749
Nice argument!

>>7268749
>cheap
no its not. LTC does the job better at 1/10 the price, as this anon >>7268663 said

>>7267910
>(bcash)
kek fuck that shitcoin trash

>>7268839
inb4 marketcap. Ok 1/3 the price..

>>7268755 see >>7259872
I know you already readed it but It explains it pretty well.
SegWit doesn't read the signatures so that's a potential flaw if a 51% occurs.
Just don't use SegWit. Move it to a non-SegWit address and you'd be fine forever.

>>7268663
Slow? It has 0-conf, its faster than all those shit coins.

Bitcoin is a peer to peer currency, your BTC is not the real bitcoin. People are starting to realize that

Honestly these bcashers are the worst. Paging drawfags we need some Wyatt Mann/Ben Garrison edits to handle this infestation.

ATENTION EVERYONE

GREEN IDS = YOU WILL HAVE NICE ARGUMENTS FOR THE REST OF THE YEAR EVERY TIME YOU SHILL YOUR COIN
RED AND PINK IDS = ALL YOUR ARGUMENTS WILL BE UTTER SHIT FOREVER
ALL THE OTHER COLORS = YOUR ARGUMENTS WILL BE FOREVER MEDIOCRE

>>7268839
Litecoin has a 1MB max. block size too.
>What is adoption?

>>7268899
>Just don't use SegWit. Move it to a non-SegWit address and you'd be fine forever.
but that isn't true.
If Segwit is stolen and it is very clear that it is flawed, it will be MtGox times 100.

Every single coin out there will get demolished in two days!

You think we will be able to explain to the normy world or to the worlds new organizations, that this only affects BTC and not other coins ?

The whole fud over Segwit is insane. If Segwit can be stolen.. every coin is equally fucked.

IF BCashers really believe this as fact, why are they not trying to help the core chain ? If it fails, everything fails..

I can't believe this fud for a second.

>>7268179
could that be because the number of bcash users (2) is underwhelmed only by the number of bcash devs (1)?

I lol @ the fact that as the crashening continues, Calvin Ayre will be able to flip BTC and BCH alone with his billions of dollars.
But he won't because he wants to accumulate.
We won't see the flippening until Q4 2018, but buy would I have stocked up on BCH by then. Target goal : 210 BCH

>>7269021
SegWit has an adoption of a 20% addresses right now. That doesn't means those addresses have BTC in it. It's just not profitable to make a 51%... yet.
Like the other anon said:
That it hasn't happened already doesn't mean it's not ever going to happen.
And I don't think SegWit is going to reach even a 50% adoption rate at this point. Lightning network is a joke on itself.

>>7269105
My goal is 21.

>>7269021
>BCashers really believe this as fact, why are they not trying to help the core chain ?

Because bcash wants to see everything and everyone fail because they failed. They’re like the crazy suicidal bitch that got spurned and now they’re worshiping the devil and talking to themselves to try and drag everyone else down

>>7269021
>Every single coin out there will get demolished in two days!
Emergency hard fork reverting ownership with 100% adoption by anyone who isnt a croook. Job done.

>>7269056
kek

>>7268910
>its faster than all those shit coins.

it's not, but I guess you know it.
you always have to wait for a next block and if your transaction didn't find a place in it then you're waiting more and more. it doesn't happen now BECAUSE PEOPLE DON'T USE IT.

so now it's "sometimes fast and sometimes 10 minutes". well, it's not bad but there are many coins faster and cheaper.

but it's not the point.
would you become a fanboy of any faster/cheaper coin than bcash is?

just answer.

if yes, then there are such coins.
if no, then why you're fucking try to use it as an argument?

>>7269105
What are your price predictions?

>>7269236
Wut. 0-conf is way faster than those coins. Is almost instantaneous.

So is bitcoin core faster because many people use it? Kek you don't know what yours talking about bro

>>7269309
>>7269309
>0-conf is way faster than those coins. Is almost instantaneous.


WHAT!&!&

>So is bitcoin core faster because many people use it? Kek you don't know what yours talking about bro

!!^#^@^#^$

>>7269236
Do you know why Litecoin is faster than Bitcoin on a technical level?
4x the total supply
10/4 minutes per block (2.5 minutes)
But still a 1MB blocksize so if mass adoption happens... same problem with fees.

>>7269229
I agree that is what will happen.. but can you imagine the fallout ?
Governements would instantly ban Bitcoin and crypto.

These BCasher are flippin insane to wish this or to be putting this out there as fud.

>>7269384
same question to you.

>would you become a fanboy of any faster/cheaper coin than bcash is?

>if yes, then there are such coins.
>if no, then why you're fucking trying to use it as an argument?

>>7269222
Yeah slashes your tires and then cuts her wrists because she lost her job because you coudln't drive her to work.
They are seriously nuts.

>>7269417
Name those coins using blockchain, with cheap transactions, largely scalable and with a working product. Please do, I'll do research.

>>7268926
OC

>>7269398
What fallout? Here's your chance. What, word for word, do you think CNN & CNBC will say to their audiences? And what percentage of said of audience will understand AND care?

These are the early days still. If you answer above is "2%" or more, then you you've misunderstood basically everything.

>>7269468
oops, forgot to crop

>>7269458
you didn't answer.
still.

will you forget your bcash saying it's a useless shitcoin because another coin is faster and/or cheaper?

>>7269497
I'm interested in any blockchain-based coin (no tokens please) with cheap fees, scalable and with a working product. I already said yes. Tell me those coins.

>>7269489
Then I guess I don't understand anything and you understand it all.

Headline

1 Billion stolen from Bitcoin
Bitcoins algorithm cracked. No longer viable.

>>7269601
SegWit addresses stolen, the rest remains the same.

>>7269338
the absolute state of BTC cucks argumentations

>>7269614
>SegWit addresses stolen, the rest remains the same.

You really believe that is how that would be presented to the world ?

There would be a panic. People would not know if their Bitcoin is Segwit or not.
The doors to sell Bitcoin would be rushed.
People would start to sell their alts minutes afterwards, "just in case"

Hell my doctor has over half her net-worth in Crypto and almost all of it in Litecoin.
She has no idea what segwit is, but she sure as hell knows how to sell.

>>7269601
>Bitcoins algorithm cracked
If that were remotely true, the headline would be "Russians can read everything": what protects bitcoin also protects .mil comms.

Simple question: do you believe TLAs would reveal they can read RussoComms or SinoComms in order to bring bitcoin down? My answer is No. And for that reason there will be no headlines, there will be no "bans" as they dare not admit to having the means of enforcement.

We're on the same page, but for different reasons I think

The problems with Bitcoin Segwit are only indirectly associated with blocksize. Segwit is the real issue and you can't reverse that. It's why Bitcoin Cash split before Segwit. With Segwit you remove the fraud proof nature of the blockchain and open it up to many mining attacks that make it technically possible (though very hard) to make fraudulent transactions. Since Bitcoin Cash doesn't remove the signatures from transactions you cannot make fraudulent transactions.

>>7269688
Here, have a nice "what if 51% attack" thread:
https://twitter.com/VitalikButerin/status/955482751750361088
It's a must.

>>7269552
Dogecoin. It already sees more transactions than bcash and has been around for years :^)

you faggots do realize that BCH is never going to overtake bitcoin, do you? it may rise with it but it will never have it's official brand that Bitcoin despite having the better technology which normies couldnt not give less of a fuck about

>>7269692
Yeah of course, I don't have a crystal ball and don't know what the exact outcome of a Bitcoin wide segwit faliure would be, but it certainly wouldn't be positive.

So I just don't understand this BCash fud campaign against Segwit. Who does it profit ?
Is anyone saying, OH SHIT !! I better sell all my Bitcoin and put it into Bcash..

Segwit thinks if they keep repeating same shit over and over it will be ok, sounds more like the fake news cnn channel also soon to be brought down too!

>>7269763
But its not better technology. YOU are the fucking normie.

>>7269490
more oc

>>7269819
This is literally fake news. Segwit was a soft-fork (not technically a fork because it is backwards compatible), Bcash was a hardfork with replay protection.

>>7269761
Wow another 1MB coin

>>7269819
that's a rough draft faggot they already changed it kek
so I guess since you dumb niggers use that to say which one is the true bitcoin, you can never say bcash is the true bitcoin again right?

>>7268873
Wow. Charlie Lie is full of shit. Those prices are t right, the hash rates aren't right, and it totally fails to acknowledge the exact same stakeholders who do the majority of sha256 mining are the ones that created the BCH hard fork to begin with, and they have 500 percent or so more mining power than even this retarded comparison accounts for. Of course they're not going to attack their own fucking project, and even if anyone else managed to muster the hash power to do so they would then effortlessly defend it.
He doesn't even seem to notice they fucking g manufacture the asic he holds up as a bulwark for his own shitcoin. I use the term "his own" loosely given he has divested himself entirely.
Why is the core side always so fucking simultaneously idiotic and dishonest?

>>7269885
Goalposts.

>>7269490
>>7269831
the jew: roger ver
his pet: jihan

>>7269871
>make segwit a softfork
>because if it was a hardfork core would be orphaned

Funny how they made it a softfork to avoid a "contentious hardfork" but now every core shill brigades anyone who doesn't use segwit. Makes ya think, huh?

>>7269552
>I already said yes.

you didn't say that (now you did).
so all the value of so-called-tru-btc is in its speed and cheapness?

it's hard to compare bcash speed with because there is no such thing. as I said you are ALWAYS WAITING FOR A NEW BLOCK. new block is 1 time in 10 minutes.
if your transaction didn't find a place in it you have to wait for the other.

trying to use bcash for everyday uses is sensless because it would be like:
> a cup of coffee please
> ok, 2 rogevertoshi
> (making transaction)
> (waiting)
> (5 minutes later) it's ok, just waiting for a new block
> (more 5 minutes later)
> ah too much transactions today let's wait another 10 minutes
> (10 minutes later) fucking whales!!! reeee!!! OK ANOTHER BLOCK IS MINE!

this is how bcash works. its speed depends on the size of current transactions and even if you are the only one making a transaction sometimes it will take 10 minutes to make it.

so near every POS coin is faster in that whay.

yes, it IS faster than btc. but it's still useless for world wide adoption for everyday uses.

and btc value is not about being useful for buying a coffee.

>>7269932
can anyone here translate tard to english?

More daily headlines of Bitcoin failing support with merchants and adoption, stick your head in the sand if you want.

Here's One Reason Why Bitcoin Is In Freefall

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2018/02/02/heres-one-reason-why-bitcoin-is-in-freefall/#7c17468f67c8

>>7270021
>unironically citing boomer-mag forbes as authoritative
kys cashie

>>7270021
>media fud on bitcoin being anything other than bullish in the long term
New to the game bruh?

The fact that dogecoin is used more for transactions than bitcoin cash says all you need to know

>>7269985
Your lobotomy doesn't mean the mathematics of hashing power are invalid, shitcock.

>>7269971
That's not exactly how it works. A new block is being mined (empty). The transactions go through (unconfirmed).
>Send 0.01 BCH
>Instantly recieve 0.01 BCH unconfirmed
>Coffee
>Wait ~10 minutes maximum (otherwise, the blocksize is raised)
>Coffee shop can move that 0.01 BCH now
You will never wait more than 10 minutes because it's hardcoded to "autofork".

>>7269971
Still waiting for that supercoin you said it exists btw, legit curious

>>7268179
Bcash? Is that a fork of that Bitcoin Trash everyone's been warning me about?

>>7270071
>What is lifetime?

1) Nobody uses Bitcoin for anything other than mostly a store of value because spending something that's limited in amount and goes up in value is retarded as fuck when you can use fiat for that just fine and actually spend the shitty money that goes down in purchasing power: fact

2) Given 1, it's stupid to centralize the network with huge nodes (inb4 Peter R, Andrew Stoner, Fakesatoshi, CIAndresen, Fyookball or any other USG drone pretending to argue otherwise) so niggers can use Bitcoin to buy KFC.

3) The people that matter (that have most of the money) is going to use the most decentralized network and the oldest one (certainty and censorship resistance above fast and cheap transactions, and no other coin can ever claim Bitcoin's track record unless you have a time machine and launch it before Bitcoin's blockchain starts making history) to store their trillions out of government's reach as traditional tax havens die (see Common Reporting Standard) and not the cheapest one, which would be any shitcoin for that matter.

4) Given 3, nobody that matters cares about forks, Core, segwit, LN or somesuch.

5) Nobody wants to fork BCash or any other shitcoin but Bitcoin, and by holding Bitcoin you get for free all these shitcoins, giving you yet another reason to hold it (forks which you dump for more Bitcoin, as idiot's BTCs are reallocated into the smart's BTC wallet; rich getting richer, naturally, as a matter of course).

Now go back to plebbit.

>>7270089
here's some mathematics for you
BTC = 9000
BCH = 1200
∴ BTC > BCH

Blockstream is playing Core and they don't even realize it.

you guys got fooled by BlockStream, its to bad but its the way the cookie crumbles

Blockstream to Issue Fiat Currency Using Blockchain Tech

https://www.trustnodes.com/2017/11/21/blockstream-issue-fiat-currency-using-blockchain-tech-raises-25-million

>>7270208
Guess we should dump everything and go buy Berkshire Hathaway then shit for brains.

This shit can't be real right? Bcash supporters are obviously just trolling, no one would be stupid enough to believe this amount of bullshit information by a bunch of name calling asshats. True shitcoin, dogecoin is better in every way. This community is even worse than the pajeets.

>>7267910
How does it make you feel that Lightning network is going to completely kill Bcash ?

>>7270138
>Instantly recieve 0.01 BCH unconfirmed

it's not recievment so you'd better not to say this.
10 minutes maximum, but it's always 10 minutes maximun even noone uses bcash this day except you.

unconfirmed transactions can be seens "almost instant" in other blockchains too, so whatever.

someone said about doge - yes, it is faster usually.
there are coins like electra or flash - they are faster.

there are dag coins, they are faster too.

so, if I hardfork bcash and make more and bigger blocks you'd a fanboy of it, as you said.

all the idea of bitcoin was about the other thing though.

>>7270204
Stupid cunt, hashing power is the central element of a blockchain, nodes are cables, hashing power is the actual CPU. If hashing power is "centralised" then so are blockchains, if it's not then how many cables lead to it are irrelevant.
Also "lol who would want to be able to actually use money to purchase goods and services" is literally the least retarded thing you said, and it's pretty fucking retarded desu.

Cash could already use Lightning without segwit if it wanted to but it would only slow it down and reduce adoption so I kind of doubt that its high on priority list right now.

>>7270204
this.
>muh alluminium is more useful people please let's call it gold from now

>>7270403
It will take more than 2 years to complete a 1TB HDD with 8MB. Not interested in Dag coins, only blockchain for me.
>https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1347.msg15366#msg15366

>>7270204

>Using bitcoin as a "store of value" when there is a limit of how many people can use the network at any one time
>Complaining about muh nodes when LN doesn't use nodes
>Doesn't understand that miners secure the network and not nodes
>Thinks he can use bitcoin as a "store of value" when high fees limit the number of buyers (The higher the fees, the smaller the number of sellable fractions you can divide your bitcoin. )
>Refuses to acknowledge that bitcoin's main supporters are India and China. Basically poor people who use bitcoin to escape government regulations.

Imagine being this much of a fucking brainlet retard

>>7270408
Only bcash soyboys want to be able to use bitcoin at their local starbucks.

Why the fuck would you want to use a deflationary asset to buy a latte you economically-illiterate cretin?

>>7270541
>Refuses to acknowledge that bitcoin's main supporters are India and China. Basically poor people who use bitcoin to escape government regulations.
Do you really think users in China and India are using Bitcoin to escape regulation of them buying coffee? No you fucking idiot, it's to prevent corrupt governments from confiscating assets, i.e. a store of value.

>>7270557
I'd love to spend 0.01 BCH in a sexshop to buy a huge black dildo for you.

>>7270589

These people can't even send their bitcoin if the fees are high. The fee of a bitcoin transaction can amount to a day's wages

You sure are fucking stupid

>>7270603
Keep your homoerotic fantasies to yourself, gay cashie faggot

>>7270557
Why would you want to be able to use money to purchase goods and services? Yeah, you're right, I'm totally fucking retarded. Fuck yourself silly thundercunt.
If you earn purely in a single currency, and spend purely in a single currency, all the other shit goes away, and that's what actually matters. Adding layers of abstraction where you earned in this currency and held in x currency and converted to spend in y currency is simply adding layers of abstraction to deal with the fact that your currency of choice is actually fucking broken and unsuitable for use as an actual medium of exchange. While currencies *not* so fucking broken have their value increased by billions of people using it as a medium of exchange, whether they're niggers buying kfc or fucking arms dealers buying lear jets.

>>7270647
>bcash i-is g-going to be the o-only world currency so i-it's all that w-will matter!
Listen to yourself. You're delusional.

Fiat is going to be here still for a quite some time whether you like it or deluded cashie. No amount of damage control and "layers of abstraction" is going to change that.

>>7270529
>It will take more than 2 years to complete a 1TB HDD with 8MB

so what?
my hardfork with 18 mb block every 5 minutes is faster, my fanboy.
hence this is the new true-bitcoin, I called it bit-fresh.

>>7270691
It doesn't matter what *is* the final single universal currency, it merely matters that is the optimal construct, therefore, it will eventually happen, and therefore, you should be evaluating cryptocurrencies that actually claim to be able to serve as currencies based on their ability to serve as said universal currency. BCH may well indeed not be it, but BTC is sure as absolute fuck not it just as you are a retarded remnant of a load that ought to have been taken in a hole not so fertile as the one you were, with supreme delusions of grandeur.

>>7270647
>gold
>gold
>gold

never was used for everyday uses.
and Satoshi didn't write about completely destroying fiat.

>muh bitcoin is a store of value
>it loses 50% in a few days
Nice

>>7270811
cashies sound more and more like nocoiners every day honestly

>>7270777
SEETHING

>>7270780
Gold was never used for every day uses? Right, never picked up a history book I see, go fuck yourself.

also that's why btc doesn't inflate, to be used as a store of value.

doge or monero do inflate 'cause they are for using here-and-now. btc is to store, btc is to count in it other goods/currensies.

>>7270835
>Gold was never used for every day uses? Right, never picked up a history book I see, go fuck yourself.

maybe there was such period in some place but it doesn't matter, you know what I mean.
for everyday uses people used other metalls in medieval at least.

>>7270884
If you take the thousand year view, hard currencies being used for every day commerce was the status quo for the vast majority of history until 1971. You really need to pick up a book and examine the actual fundamentals of the market in which you find yourself, you clearly lack awareness presently.

>>7268755
the point you are missing is that this IS THE WHOLE REASON FOR THE BCASH FORK.

So the epic disaster happens, and it's supposed to make the coin whose entire existence is based on stopping that from happening look bad?

Not to mention that wouldn't even be the biggest hack by market cap %. Bitcoin had a huge one in the early days, ethereum had a huge one and look at it now.

BTC = ETC
BCH = ETH

It's not a perfect comparison in any means, but with regards to the survival of an adverse event it is spot on.

>>7270824
>cashies sound more and more like nocoiners every day honestly

as I said, they don't get a simple idea of btc=gold.
uselessness even makes it more similar.

>>7270899
>hard currencies
>hard currencies
>hard currencies
>implying gold
>implying buying a coffee

>>7270899
>every day commerce was the status quo for the vast majority of history until 1971.
You're conflating the end of the gold standard with the end of use of gold as an everyday currency, which ended at the latest in 1933.

You really think people were paying for cars with gold bullion in 1970?

Dishonest.

>>7269021
>>7269222
I refuse to believe that you guys are being genuine. You can't be that stupid/brainwashed/whatever.

Cash supporters don't want that to happen. That's why Bitcoin Cash was created. If you use the version of bitcoin that doesn't allow that to happen, it CAN'T HAPPEN.

It was impossible in any version of bitcoin before august 1st 2017, and it is still impossible in bitcoin cash. How exactly will bitcoin cash supporters be responsible if the weakness of the OTHER FORK is exploited?

>>7270962
If I'm using certificates that represent x for trade, then I'm not using the certificates for trade, I'm using x, the certificates are just a convenience. The hard currency part is what actually matters, and that is why currencies with deflationary supply curves are eventually guaranteed to outcompete those with inflationary supply curves, because this is the model that the species is most familiar with over the entire course of human history, the monetary experiments of the previous century have resulted in economic disaster and a a postmodern world, to re-instate actual material reality requires a unit of account which is not subject to manipulation, this is why central bankers and their supporters constantly rant about their independence, because they know how essential such an attribute is for a money.
Everyone else ignores it because everyone else accepts they have no independence at all, and as humans are subject to political manipulation and all the typical flaws of humanity, they just don't follow that through the natural conclusion as to what that implies about fiat currencies.

>>7269417
Yes. I am a HUGE fanboy of the fastest and cheapest coin there is.

>>7270952
The only reason gold was used is because it was a hard currency, historically China preferred silver, it also was still a hard currency, focusing on the element in question is missing the forest for the trees. The hard currency part is what matters, if you ensure that by prevalence of an element originally generated by stellar nucleosynthesis or hashing power examining a number space given an inefficiency of equipment resulting in an issuance rate of x doesn't matter, they are both just means to the same ends.

>>7270991
>If you use the version of bitcoin that doesn't allow that to happen, it CAN'T HAPPEN.

you also can't make some kinds of attacks in POS coins - let's make bit-pos fork then.

(even if your fud about segwit was true)

hack it if you can, steal it if you can, doesn't #dragonslayer actually want to slay the dragon?

>>7270930
>corecucks now literally list uselessness as feature

>>7271079
>(even if your fud about segwit was true)
>hack it if you can, steal it if you can, doesn't #dragonslayer actually want to slay the dragon?
Nice rhetoric

>you also can't make some kinds of attacks in POS coins - let's make bit-pos fork then.
Changing proof of work to proof of stake is not the same as NOT CHANGING signature verification. Which is what bitcoin cash did to "cause" the fork (by your twisted version of causality).

>>7269763
First of all, there's no such thing as "official" bitcoin. That's a hell of a contradiction. Secondly, bitcoin cash IS the original bitcoin.

>>7269786
Obviously you don't, because this has been the argument against segwit for almost 3 years now.

>>7270991
Bitcoin cash wasn't created to solve the possible Segwit issue. Bitcoin Cash used the fact no one was using Segwit on Bitcoin yet as a reason for why BCash should be used. You guys could at least be better than the fucking equivalent of an SJW artist who changes why they made whatever shit they did to appeal to the largest audience who's listening.
Letting Bitcoin die to this at all would have a major negative impact on the Crypto market as a whole even if it wasn't the main cryptocurrency in the economy because if "KING BITCOIN" could have such an issue what other coins do to? It wouldn't matter if it was true, it would just compound every other mistake that has been made.

>>7271376
Dude, you think you can tell me . . . I've been watching the debate since before it fucking started. Bitcoin Cash finally forked because Blockstream used the updates to the wallet client to force a hardfork in favor of segwit. up until a few days before the fork everyone that is presently a Cash supporter insisted on not making any changes until a true consensus was built. THAT is the only reason the 8mb blocksize fork was sloppy. Because after 2 years of debate blockstream came up with the newspeak term "User Activated Soft Fork" to get their irreversible changes in through the back door. If that phrase doesn't immediately set of alarm bells . . . you're brainwashed. Not just about bitcoin, but about something. Only brainwashed people can swallow propaganda like that.

>>7267910
>Just use LTC or Doge when BTC dies
>Not going to use BCH

>>7267910
>>Bitcoiner legit thinks Monero/Litecoin/Doge are forks of Bitcoin
But they are, you fucking retard. You don't even know what a fork is. You don't know anything about software development.

>>7272223
this

not really concerned with a few 100 core supporters, were going for world adoption and a 200 trillion MC

>>7267910
Why everybody hate a BCH? If u hold BTC u have BCH too, or u sell u bch a 300 usd?

>>7272223
They're variably removed forks of the codebase.
That is utterly different to forks of the original blockchain.

>>7272519
>or u sell u bch a 300 usd?
Plenty did, and that's also
>Why everybody hate a BCH?
If you sold your gold for pyrite, you'd probably have pretty strong feelings about pyrite too.

>>7268341
I think you mean “Delusional” utilitarian that knows what value is over price.

Someone that calls out the fact that bitcoin is a case of the emporers new clothes with arrogant, socialist, and pretty mediocre devs (although they are good cryptographers), that think mining doesn’t add value but miserly hodling does?

It gives new meaning to the phrase doing nothing is doing something.

Forget Craig Wright, Jihan Wu and Roger Ver - they each are extremely valuable community members in their own right but fundamentally BCH even without them will be the one to keep gaining value, new merchants, use and eventually BTC will just be a collectors item, while BCH acts like a black hole for everything else’s market cap.

>in before lightning network
- yeah good luck with that ico - shitcoin of the decade.

>>7272780
which is not what was stated. It was stated that they were forks of bitcoin, which they are. Nobody said they were forks of bitcoin's blockchain

Ver broke the rule of the Internet, he got angry about being trolled, thus ensuring everyone would see him as a lolcow and continue to troll the shit out of him. He is also the overly autistic sort of libertarian. Like in one Youtube video I saw of him he was replying to someone who e-mailed him and said he was e-mailing him from work. Ver responded by saying the guy who e-mailed him was defrauding his employer by e-mailing him when he was supposed to be working. That is the kind of anal weirdo he is.
>judge bcash on it's own merits not on ver!
It doesn't work that way, it will succeed or fail based on the image it projects and thanks to him that image is bad. Also while it may have advantages over actual Bitcoin, there are so many other coins with advantages over both Bitcoin and Bcash. Bitcoin's name brand recognition will only take it so far, and besides Bitcoin will always have more namebrand recognition and be seen as the real Bitcoin to normies.

>>7273234
Focusing on personalities and humans is surely the greatest metric ever conceived of in order to evaluate the worth of a decentralised cryptocurrency

>>7273101
Yeah, they did. http:// boards.4chan.org/biz/thread/7255622#p7267007

>>7273284
usually it would be judged more on the devs, but there are none. also no users.

>>7273548
Usually medieval physicians would treat patients with leeches. That doesn't make it reasonable. Evaluate the actual logical and mathematical parameters of the construct in question. Hint; None of them have anything to do with personalities.
What really matters is how is the source of truth established, and the answer is proof of work via a blockchain, it doesn't matter if random flesh puppet x is a tard, autist, baller, kiddie fiddler, or what the fuck, or how they're related to or not related to what project. The construct does not rely on human decisions by nature. That is in fact why it is valuable.

>>7273491
A core supporter did. Obviously they don't even know what they're talking about. I didn't care to check that thread (and I still don't want to read it) so I spoke too soon. But that post actually strengthens my position, lmao.

>>7273801
Yeah fwiw I agree with you. Just technical correct is the best kind of correct and all.

>>7273620
>judging the future prospects of technology by the skills of its developers = using leeches in medicine
amazing.

>>7273887
Developers aren't magicians anymore than physicians are, the best developers in the world can't make bad math work, and only the worst developers in the world actually try. Necessarily conclusion; Core are the worst developers in the world, because they are trying to make something work that simply mathematically cannot.
They are thus either stupid, in case they honestly and earnestly believe the goal they say they are aiming for can be hit, or liars, in case they are well aware it cannot, and that it will, to the extent it succeeds, necessarily result in centralisation of BTC.

>>7267910
I literally just made a Bitcoin transaction for 10 cents (0.00001 fee).

And it took 3 minutes to confirm.

Bcashies on suicide watch.

Bitcoin is essentially the next generation of Napster. As Mark Cuban once said, "I won't invest in Bitcoin, but I will invest in the successor to Bitcoin." BCash is the successor to Bitcoin, I am going all it.

Not only is Bitcoin Unlimited donating its resources, but developers and representatives from several projects including Bitprim, Nchain, Bitcrust, ElectrumX, Parity, Bitcoin ABC, and Bitcoin XT are also all collaborating to bolster the BCH protocol’s growth.

>>7269468
>>7269490
Cute

>>7273982
zero developers also can't make anything work..

a better analogy than yours would be opening a new hospital with no doctors then complaining about how other medicine can't work.

also please explain what you are referring to that mathematically cannot work. my guess: you read some fud medium article and can't understand much math yourself

>>7274001
Congratulations, transaction volume in BTC is the lowest it has been since early 2016. I'm sure they're quaking in their boots as their forecasts of your imminent failure are being rapidly met by your pathetic performance.

>>7269831
>more oc
cool, me too

>>7269959

>>7273878
Agree. I'm happy to be corrected :)
>>7274070
>the fictional reality in my head says you're wrong. checkmate.

>>7274107
wasn't le flippening supposed to happen like 2 months ago? hows that going?

>>7274070
BCH doesn't have "no developers" it has eight competing decentralised teams. Aside from that you're totally right, which is to say not at all.
What mathematically cannot work is lightning as a decentralised routing network. It is guaranteed to result in hub and spoke topology, and huge surprise, that's exactly what's happening in actual reality, thus, to the extent this can be considered a success, it will necessarily result in the centralisation implicit in said topology, and to the extent anyone who actually thinks the decentralisation aspect is essential, it is a failure.
Maybe you should just stick to "bcash lol" if your ability to comprehend the terrain in question is this limited? Most of your buddies seem to get laughs with it.

>>7274135
Worry about your own collapsing marketshare, corecuck

>>7268179
Stop making those threads, I'd vastly prefer FUD.

Ultimately we both know it will win, so in the mean time just help the prices stay down, if you'd be so kind.

>>7274181
you realize that chart also shows bcash dominance decreasing right? how slow can you be..

>>7274135
It's going pretty great actually. BCH has a steadily rising floor since the fork. If the two years before the fork wasn't enough to cut through the blockstream propaganda I fully expect it to take another two years to accomplish.

>>7274233
>deflect, deflect, deflect

Sophistry and bullshit are the mantra of bcuck.

There will be two kind of Bitcoins. Bitcoin for bankers and Governments (BTC) and Bitcoin Cash for the total of mankind including IoT (BCH). I hold both, but my heart goes to BCH

>>7274259
it's pretty on point, you're the one that brought up dominance as a metric of success. by your own metric bcash is doing awful.

my argument was that ongoing development was the best metric. that metric makes bcash look like shit, you chose another metric, and it's still shit.

>>7269971
0 conf can work on BCH because if you check for double spends and that the transaction appears in the mem pool, you can be reasonably sure that it will be included in the next block

>>7274310
Except that you're actually not even *correct* in your shitty deflection, if you plot a trend on the chart in question for BCH dominance from the beginning to the end, it's upward. BTC dominance from the beginning to the end is downward. In order for what you're saying to be true you have to start at the top of the most recent BCH peak and count downward only. That would be retarded.
But since you are exactly that... I guess there really are no surprises here.

>>7270557
Because I need food to live, you cretin

>>7274295
fukken saved

>>7274380
yeah that's not quite how moving averages work buddy but nice try. you don't pick a specific point to start the chart, you pick the last x amount of time and take an average price. and it's trending downward.

>>7274438
>price chart
So you didn't actually even look at the chart enough to establish that it's not even a price chart?
And you also just made a statement about the price chart that is also wrong?
You're fucking hilarious man, please, continue. BCH started at 300 USD, do tell us how the overall trend is downward by all means.
Stupid fuck.

>>7270557
BCH is gonna implement smart contract and coloured coins, they could quite easily make an inflationary asset on it just for making payments (similar to Vericoin vs Verium).

>>7274479
>So you didn't actually even look at the chart enough to establish that it's not even a price chart?
what chart are you referring to that isn't a price chart? is your argument that a moving average price chart is not a price chart? try to use your words

Bcash the fucking AIDs of crypto, bitconnecters have more integrity than a bcasher.

>>7274538
The chart that you actually responded to with the false claim that it shows the dominance of Bitcoin Cash decreasing;
>>7274181
>>7274233
It's not a price chart, it's a market cap dominance chart. Further, a price chart over the same period would not show BTC outperforming BCH by any stretch of the imagination. In summary in every way it is possible to be wrong, you are wrong.

>>7269236
>so now it's "sometimes fast and sometimes 10 minutes". well, it's not bad but there are many coins faster and cheaper.
It has zero confirmation transactions which get accepted in seconds. It is THE fastest blockchain. Confirmations don't really matter for 99% of transactions with BCH.

>>7274580
careful man, its best to not force reality onto schizophrenics. I know from personal experience that they can get incredibly violent.

>>7274580
I wasn't talking about that chart in the comment you replied to, not sure you're following

> a price chart over the same period would not show BTC outperforming BCH by any stretch of the imagination
would it show the BCH-BTC hovering at around the same values with a few pump n dumps thrown in?
https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitcoin-cash/

>>7274630
> I wasn't talking about that chart in the comment you replied to, not sure you're following
... *YOU* replied to the comment you insane fuck, with the comment that it demonstrated the dominance of BCH decreasing, which it does not. Get help.
>would it show the BCH-BTC hovering at around the same values with a few pump n dumps thrown in?
If you define everything that demonstrates that it is outperforming BTC as "a few pump and dumps" sure. Thanks for making it clear that's what you're doing, as if any further demonstration was necessary.

Bitcoin vs. a shitty forked bcash with obvious bad actors keeping it propped up

Gee I wonder what's better and what'll be around in ten years

Anyone who uses the terms bcash/cashie/btrash etc is almost certainly a paid shill by Blockstream thus you should not even bother reading the garbage they post. I surf through each post for those keywords, if they exist then there's no point in actually reading the content of the post.

There is no other coin that receives hate for merely existing, for whatever reason (mostly FEAR) the Blockstream kikes believe that misnaming Bitcoin Cash somehow diminishes it's value. It does not, it is merely annoying.

Bitcoin Cash is Bitcoin, the only Bitcoin.

ITT: bcash bagholders talking out of their fucking asses about Segwit. Lololololol this is pathetic

>>7274233
>you realize that chart also shows bcash dominance decreasing right? how slow can you be..
It doesn't show Bcash dominance dropping. It drops right at the end, but it is trending upward.

>>7275025
Still no arguments from you Segwit Soyboys.

>>7267910

Why does "bcash" upset cashies so much?

Is it because they're trying to piggyback of the Bitcoin brand with their altcoin and 'bcash' reminds them of their rightful place?

I don't understand why Roger Ver gets so buttblasted over having it called bcash.

>>7269168
the vulnerability segwi introduces does not require majority hash power. Segwit means you can still receive fees for mining blocks without witness data. Segwit literally breaks the nash equilibrium thay proof of work is based on.

If you are holding btc right now your wealth is completely dependent on jihan, roger, calvin or any other pro btc miners not colluding to mine blocks excluding witness data. they could take advantage of this principle to prove themselves right

>>7269601
in other news
central banks still financially repressing their citizens
bitcoin cash a peer to peer electronic cash that lets you send any amount of money for 1sat/byte anywhere in the world within 10 minutes on sale that nobody can stop

>>7275690
>Is it because they're trying to piggyback of the Bitcoin brand with their altcoin and 'bcash' reminds them of their rightful place?
Remember how the first thing you get told when investing in cryptos is to read the whitepaper. Yet Segwit forced the developers to abandon the whitepaper. Literally the only thing Bitcoin Segwit has is the brand which it stole from Bitcoin Cash. Once Bitcoin Cash reaches equal value with Bitcoin Segwit then it will lose the brand as well. You can't fundamentally change the basic nature of a crypto-currency and try and keep the name. The level of deception you fags pull is ridiculous. By definition Bitcoin Segwit is not an "electronic coin" according to Satoshi, and "electronic coin" was Satoshi's name for crypto-currencies. Bitcoin Segwit by definition is not a crypto-currency.

>>7275887

Also bitcoin has no brand since it is not copyrighted

bitcoin cash and brian armstrong caused this crash, you're not welcome

bump

btc merchant adoption is shrinking bch adoption is growing
there is not a single reason to cap blocks at 1mb (non mining nodes do nothing)
segwit destroys the mining nash equilibrium incentivising the collusion of miners to change the UTXO without owners signatures. You can only trust jihan and roger to not be doing this right now.
why introduce segwit before a blocksize increase when lightning network requires 133mb as specified in the lightning network whitepaper
why introduce segwit at all when it is not necessary for second layer solutions
lightning network will not be decentralized because to solve the routing problem would be to solve the P=NP problem (a millenium prize problem)
why would anyone want lightning network when it is not a decentralised ledger? the whole point of bitcoin is to scale on chain as that is what makes decentralised uncensorable money which can free all the people in the world from the financial repression of central banks

>>7275924
Which is why BCH is Bitcoin Cash, and not Bcash.

not that it bothers me, I actually use Bcash ironically all the time.

>>7273620
>Usually medieval physicians would treat patients with leeches. That doesn't make it reasonable
Yeah, and markets aren't rational either. People are far more likely to trust BCash or not based on their impression of Ver than on careful analysis of the technical pros and cons. And without normie support it will never go anywhere regardless of how superior it might be.

>>7275788
In more news. Family man that lost 90% in Bitcoin Segwit immediately doubles down and mortgages the house to drive his entire net worth into bcash.

You people are delusional.

>>7267910
Bcash

Bcash 20k eoy and real fun starts after that, be best to just ignore the children name calling as they don’t know who their real daddy is