/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>7277810

literally nobody cares about bcash dude shut up

>>7277828
Thanks for the bump

>>7277828
You know he put a bunch of questions in his post, the least you could do is answer a few of them.

>>7277884
k
>>7277810
>btc merchant adoption is shrinking bch adoption is growing
nobody cares
>there is not a single reason to cap blocks at 1mb (non mining nodes do nothing)
non mining full nodes validate the consensus rules
>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.
this is only problematic because of temporary miner centralization caused by bitmains temporary asic monopoly
>why introduce segwit before a blocksize increase when lightning network requires 133mb as specified in the lightning network whitepaper
lightning seems to be progressing just fine with 1mb blocks
>why introduce segwit at all when it is not necessary for second layer solutions
the functionality that segwit provides enables lightning network, namely the ability the refer to unsigned transactions (the key functionality that lightning requires)
>lightning network will not be decentralized because to solve the routing problem would be to solve the P=NP problem (a millenium prize problem)
doesnt matter because lightning nodes cannot distinguish transactions
>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
lightning network is basically freeing coins from the blockchain to be settled at a later time. bcash has admitted that their plan for scaling is for huge mining centers to be the only full nodes which would require millions of $ of infrastructure per year to support

bear in mind that i sold all my bcash at .2 and all my bitcoin at 18k
i do not like either of them

>>7277810
It is a stupid short-sighted way of scaling, no one cares about your shitcoin just let it die already. If you haven't been able to process the arguments by now then just kill yourself no one is going to explain it to you.

Biz and r/btc have the same trolls, cash is superior and will pass shitcoin later this year in 4th quarter probably

Nobody likes or uses core coin, if exchanges weren’t stuck having to use it it’s market cap should be about 5 percent

>>7277810
Fuck off op.

>>7277810
This is literally every argument used against me in another thread days ago compiled and made into a thread. Why does /biz/ push these false agendas, its making me wierdly paranoid. Any productive, useful information is quickly ignored or attacked, its like its almost intentional. Bcash is obviously a shitcoin and increasing blocksize will never make it a competitor to even Visa, its not a solution. Why are the worst, most uneducated trade ideas constantly shared???

>>7278025
no one likes bcash either
you can keep shilling and posting your stale memes like ripplets, but you're not going to get the 4k you spent buying bcash at ATH back

>ETH
>led by 250 iq genius who doesn't give a fuck about money
>largest dev ecosystem
>working on multiple scaling solutions

>bcash
>led by insane megalomaniac
>followers are annoying twats who raid other crypto communities and are in it only for the money
>defining feature is changing one variable

>>7277943
>nobody cares
No one cares about how many people use your product? Really?
>non mining full nodes validate the consensus rules
They are witnesses only, if they don't mine they cannot make changes if consensus rules are broken.
>this is only problematic because of temporary miner centralization caused by bitmains temporary asic monopoly
No its caused by the Segwit selfish mining attack where if a cartel forms it is ALWAYS more profitable to discard signatures.
>lightning seems to be progressing just fine with 1mb blocks
It doesn't route transactions automatically and they are losing customer funds
>the functionality that segwit provides enables lightning network, namely the ability the refer to unsigned transactions (the key functionality that lightning requires)
The Lightning Network has existed since Bitcoin was released, you could always stream money. The Bitcoin Cash version of lightning has fees 350 times lower to open a channel so it is more efficient. The adoption just isn't there to make it necessary.
>doesnt matter because lightning nodes cannot distinguish transactions
He said the Lightning Network routing as promised by Blockstream is impossible so it does matter. I think you just didn't want to talk about this so you fudged it.
>lightning network is basically freeing coins from the blockchain to be settled at a later time. bcash has admitted that their plan for scaling is for huge mining centers to be the only full nodes which would require millions of $ of infrastructure per year to support
A lot wrong here, but financial institutions would run nodes, so would universities, so would tech companies, so you would have tens of thousands of nodes. Also the infrastructure required is not millions of dollars. I just built a gaming pc that can handle 600-800 tx/s which is almost half what VISA does.
>bear in mind that i sold all my bcash at .2 and all my bitcoin at 18k
Good LARP.

>>7277810

>>7278088
>>ETH
>>led by 250 iq genius who doesn't give a fuck about money
>>largest dev ecosystem
>>working on multiple scaling solutions
You mean led by a communist who has said multiple times he will censor users and has already forked the coin for some thefts but not others so he acts as God of his coin. Also if Ethereum runs on desktops and Bitcoin Cash on industrial grade computers its not even a competition on who will win. You can't beat a motorcycle if you ride a bike.

>>7278088
>followers are annoying twats who raid other crypto communities and are in it only for the money
How can we raid other communities if we are censored literally everywhere. This makes no sense. Crypto was literally designed to stop censorship and that is all Segwit supporters do is censor. I mean at least by bringing up ETH you brought up a coin that has a chance against BCH but that chance is slim.

>>7277810
>lightning network will not be decentralized because to solve the routing problem would be to solve the P=NP problem (a millenium prize problem)

Source?

>>7277810
>lightning network will not be decentralized because to solve the routing problem would be to solve the P=NP problem (a millenium prize problem)
that is fucking wrong brainlet, this retarded argument was BTFO by both Vitalik Buterin and Bram Cohen

Take a fucking CS class.

>>7278115
>Also if Ethereum runs on desktops and Bitcoin Cash on industrial grade computers its not even a competition on who will win. You can't beat a motorcycle if you ride a bike.

Is this even serious? Like are you trolling or what?

>>7277810
>lightning network will not be decentralized because to solve the routing problem would be to solve the P=NP problem
nice LARP

>>7278115
>Also if Ethereum runs on desktops and Bitcoin Cash on industrial grade computers its not even a competition on who will win.
this stupid cashie faggot doesn't even understand the point of a decentralized cryptocurrency and seems to think that a shitcoin that can only run on "industrial grade computers" is somehow a selling point rather than a point of centralization and weakness.

>>7278102
>No one cares about how many people use your product? Really?
i already said i dont care. i own neither btc or bch. i think they are both inferior to newer blockchains
>They are witnesses only
yup. very important
>It doesn't route transactions automatically and they are losing customer funds
k im not up to date on lightning because i dont care about bitcoin
>The Lightning Network has existed since Bitcoin was released
wrong, this is history re-writing. as i said if you understand the tech you would know that lightning requires certain functionality which segwit brought ot the table
>He said the Lightning Network routing as promised by Blockstream is impossible so it does matter. I think you just didn't want to talk about this so you fudged it.
i conceded his point, but also explained that it doesnt matter. furthermore, the decentralization that you are bitching about here is a continuum akin to your bisexuality. the test network seemed to be decently decentralized - it all depends on your standard of decentralization
>financial institutions would run nodes, so would universities, so would tech companies, so you would have tens of thousands of nodes. Also the infrastructure required is not millions of dollars
i am literally going off of a paper published on medium written by bcash devs... so you are arguing against your own devs
>Good LARP
jealous bag holder detected. keep holding your shitcoin which has already mooned. meanwhile i rode the bch xrp trx ven and wtc waves in the last few months

>>7278131
>Crypto was literally designed to stop censorship

Proove

Corecucks are truly in damage control mode

XRP > BCH

[Performance]
-Ripple consistently handles 1,500 transactions per second, 24x7.
-Payment channels can process 10s of 1000s of transactions per second.

.
[Cost]
-A standard transaction costs just 0.00001 XRP.
-The cost is not paid to any party: it's irrevocably destroyed.

.
[Real-world use]
-5 institusions are currently using XRP (MoneyGram, Cuallix, FlashFX, IDT and MercuryFX).
-Many banks are currently using xCurrent. Since xRapid is cheaper (saves up to 60%) and provides final settlement, they are likely to transition to it.
-Bichip will use XRP in its RFID chips.
-A w3c standard that Ripple helped develop (and was demo'd by Microsoft) will be available in all major browsers, it'll facilitate paying with XRP.

.
[Economics]
-The supply is fixed.
-Unlike Bitcoin, there's no inflation. Bitcoin uses PoW which relies on inflation and/or high fees. Bitcoin requires $18M of net new $ flowing in just to maintain the price!!

.
[Security]
-Unlike Bitcoin, double-spending isn't possible. Bitmain (a Chinese company) can rollback Bitcoin's chain and bunkrupt the whole ecosystem.
-An attack could only stop new transactions temporarily. Participants would simply remove bad participants from their list

.
[Decentralisation]
-Each participant can run a validator and use his own list of validators.
-validators role is to agree on an order for new transactions
-10s of reputable public & private entities around the world are currently running validators (e.g., Microsoft, MIT, CGI, WorldLink, Bahnhof,..)
-Consensus for the order of new transactions requires a supermajority of 80%

.
[Incentives]
-XRP is a revenue source for Ripple Labs. This aligns its incentives with XRP hodlers. It uses the revenue to improve the tech and expand XRP's marketshare.
-Ripple Labs share is locked in 55 batches on the network. Only one batch can be unlocked per month. It would take them 5 years to unlock them all. XRP is sold only to long term investors (i.e., they can't dump).

>>7278142
>Is this even serious? Like are you trolling or what?
Where's your argument bud?

>>7278340

this is the chief scientist btw

I only post about Riple in Ripple but I'm making an exception since retarded bcashers are in every Ripple thread.

Bitcoin begone!

>>7278189
>this stupid cashie faggot doesn't even understand the point of a decentralized cryptocurrency and seems to think that a shitcoin that can only run on "industrial grade computers" is somehow a selling point rather than a point of centralization and weakness.
The fact that you need capital to start a competitive business in a market economy is not centralization. That's freedom you communist faggot. The same capital requirements exist for nearly all forms of industry. Farming isn't centralized because you need tractors to farm. Centralization implies central control, which can only be created through the use of force.

>>7278363
*in Ripple threads

>>7278353
Your argument is pro-centralization. Retarded on its face and not worth engaging.

>>7278363

>>7278340
That list conveniently excludes nano and xlm. Really makes you think

>>7278374
>banks and coinbase controlling crypto is a good thing

Jesus the corecucks in this thread. I can't even fathom the level of delusion, stupidity, or whatever it is that makes people still go along with core. I don't even care if you support BCH or LTC or Nano or whatever the fuck as your currency, but supporting core is just fucking wrong. You DON'T actually comprehend the technicals or economic incentives if you're following their "vision". You're just a sheep. Plain and simple. Your bullshit makes me physically ill and the "bcash" shit you spout is the most poignant piece of evidence that you live in an echo chamber crazy house.

>>7278363
>this is the chief scientist btw
He's talking about with a 4 core processor. So desktop computers can run up to 500 tx/s. But if you have industrial tech you can do it today. He has a whole youtube video on this. Craig is talking about 50,000 tx/s without desktops as full nodes Peter is talking about 50,000 tx/s with desktop computers. They are both right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SJm2ep3X_M

>>7278340
>>7278363

now let's talk about merchants and payments.

The future of payments is Interledger. Bitcoin Cash doesn't stand a chance.
>w3c standard
>invented at Ripple
>developed by the Interledger W3C Community Group
>first implementation is coming out soon for XRP and ETH
>allows anyone to pay with almost anything
>people will be able to pay with crypto even if the merchant accepts just fiat
interledger.org


>>7278393
nano is inherently insecure, it can't be fixed.

Stellar is a shitty fork of Ripple, and according to the site, it handles 1000 tps, Ripple handles 1500 tps.

>>7278397

Nodes do not add to the security of the network. How many times does this need to be repeated? If there were 1 miner and 1000000000000 nodes it wouldn't make a fucking difference. the 1 miner controls the network.

>>7278381
>Retarded on its face and not worth engaging.
Hmm sounds like you're projecting here guy.

Bcash is the biggest shitcoin in history. Ver is a spoiled little brat who threw a tantrum when core didn't want annoying dumbass "Bitcoin Jesus" trying to tell them what to do. So he makes a shitcoin and says it's better. It's shit. BTC will be scaling soon far beyond what Bcrap can do. If you are in this shitcoin god help you because Bitcoin Jesus will not save you. You literally bought a tantrum coin. Good job.

>>7278397
There are tens of thousands of banks around the world and they have different owners. Universities and Research Institutes would run full nodes and there are again tens of thousands of those. Large Retail corporations would run full nodes as they would actually be targetted if a 51% attack would occur. There are again thousands of those. And then wealthy hobbyists would also run full nodes. There are again thousands of those.

>>7278443
if anyone is wondering, XRP will be the most used coin for Interledger because it's the fastest and cheapest.

0-conf is insecure and won't be recognized by interledger anyway, so Bitcoin Cash won't be used significantly with Interledger because of the confirmation delay.

>>7278443
>nano is inherently insecure, it can't be fixed
And we know this is true because you're making a write up and submitting it to their bug bounty program so that you can claim your $100k reward, right anon?

>Stellar is a shitty fork of Ripple,
Thanks for proving that you don't even know what you're talking about. How much are they paying you pajeet? Is it per hour or per post?

>>7278457
>BTC will be scaling soon far beyond what Bcrap can do
Are you sure? Bitcoin Cash is testing Terabyte blocks with 7 million transactions per second and that's just onchain. BCH can still offer its own version of Lightning and the Lightning on BCH has lower fees. So BCH beats Segwit in terms of scaling in all avenues.

>>7277810
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
BCASH IS BITCOIN

>>7278508
>And we know this is true because you're making a write up and submitting it to their bug bounty program so that you can claim your $100k reward, right anon?


retard, the issues are known, they were posted and even a nano developer acknowledged it.

I'll post a link for the tweet later. He said he's aware of the problem but still haven't found a solution.

>>7277943
>nobody cares
so you agree
>non mining full nodes validate the consensus rules
non mining nodes have no way of validating consensus rules. This is like saying you can change the outcome of a tennis match by watching it on tv
>this is only problematic because of temporary miner centralization caused by bitmains temporary asic monopoly
it has nothing to do with % hashpower it can be implemented without 50%. Why would you tolerate this risk even if it was due to your incorrect reasoning
>lightning seems to be progressing just fine with 1mb blocks
doesn't answer the question
>lightning network is basically freeing coins from the blockchain to be settled at a later time. bcash has admitted that their plan for scaling is for huge mining centers to be the only full nodes which would require millions of $ of infrastructure per year to support
once again full noes do nothing. gigabyte blocks can be run easily on todays technology

>>7278086
not a single argument. maybe that's why you feel paranoid

>>7278088
ad hominens

>>7278164
if you can solve the routing problem you will receive a nobel prize, $1000000 from millennium fund and indefinite historic recognition

>>7278531
I'm waiting

>>7278452
>Nodes do not add to the security of the network
Repeating this shit proves how little you know about Bitcoin.

Nodes secure the network by keeping a copy of the blockchain and checking which txs to validate. This is pretty important in preventing sybil attacks.

You're literally fine with cucking yourself to Chinese miners who may or may not have your best interests in mind. kys

>>7278644
Non mining nodes cannot validate transactions, they have no ability to do work.

Non mining nodes are useful as a backup of the ledger and as a way of being plugged in to the ledger to observe it acurately without relying on a third party

I just can't believe the OP (Roger Ver) actually posts on 4chan. It's freeking hilarious.

>>7278616
thanks for wasting my time faggot, I'll be posting this on every nano/xrb thread from now on.

you better sell your bags now.

here's one for eth I too

Can Bcash cucks fuck off already? Sure, bitcoin is not perfect, and if the time comes to switch from bitcoin, we will go in ETH or ADA. Nobody cares about your shit fork.

>>7278887
Dos attacks are not security issues and no one said the problem is unsolvable you curry stinking liar

>>7277810
The Blockstream & Associates plan.

-Cripple BTC -> need for LN
-Deploy LN
-Use BTC brand to push payment/merch systems move to LN
-Network effect and 1st mover adv. moved to LN
-BTC stripped of value
-Add coins as LN settlement (in progress): LTC, VTC, etc.
-BTC 2020 price: $0

'LN ready' coins at Blockstream's initiative (inc. Segwit), will join BTC in the pool of LN settlement tokens:

GRS
SYS
BTX
DGB
MON
LTC
VTC
NAV
VIA
CRE
XMY

From 21 million to 24 BILLION coins, all INDISTINGUISHABLE as 'LN store of value tokens'. Impact on price?..

>>7278925
you got rekt, pajeet. You got triggered when I said there was a serious problem and you acknowledged it only after the proof.

It can be fixed. It's a flaw in the architecture itself.

Expect this screenshot in every nano thread. Hell, I might post it in non nano threads just for fun. Your bags will be even more worthless.

>>7278925
> not a security problem

kek
you know what happens when a coin becomes unusable? the market cap evaporates, this is equivalent or worse then stealing most of the coins.

>>7278955
PS Blockstream is a commercial company which intends on profiting from its proprietary code, Corecusk were fucked and they keep asking for more.

>>7278996
You said it was inherently insecure and the problem can't be fixed. You linked to a tweet of a developer talking about a basic dos attack, which has nothing to do with security, and him saying that its a top priority to be fixed. You literally played yourself.

>>7279031
*equivalent to or worse than

>>7279049
it's not a network ddos attack, it's a protocol ddos attack, which has everything to do with security.

only retards like you disagree so I'm not going to waste my time convincing you, I'll just keep posting this screenshot everywhere so bagholders dump on your ass and potential buyers look for something else.

>>7277810
Who gives a fuck if merchant adoption for btc is shrinking but rising for bcash, no-one uses it as a currency, it's a commodity and a store of value, and not for normans to buy itunes credits with.

The mistake you, and other retards like Ver make is thinking you need normans to mass adopt your shitcoin to make it a success. Guess what? Normans will NEVER adopt this shit for the simple fact they are fucking normans. It should really be called cryptocommodity because it'll never be used as a currency, it'll be used by the minority to store their value.

That's why bcash is doomed to fail and bitcoin will succeed. Imagine hitching your wagon to bcash on the basis that normans will adopt it and it will go up.. talk about fucking stupid.

>>7279085
Nice moving goal posts there anon. I'm literally a security developer and you've demonstrating a compete lack of knowledge. Your bluff got called and you didn't have the sense too so what any pajeet with an iq above 94 would do and just call me a retarded faggot

>>7279134
Pajeet, stop trying, you are making it worse for your shitcoin. Only retarded pajeets like you think an attack that makes the network unusable is not a security issue.

>>7278340
Bad Pajeet! XRP won't be used in Ripple solutions, they announced it last week, you should pay more attention to your employer's press releases...

>>7278363
500 tx/s is still far better than BTC.

>>7279122
oh no it's retarded. it's a store of value only as long as it increases in value over time. it only increases in value over time if there's more buying than selling. there's only more buying than selling if it's actually a thing that DOES SOMETHING. Bitcoin gained its original value by being a means of fast and cheap transacting without a trusted third party. without its ability to maintain that at high volumes, it's useless and thus worthless.

>>7278426

>>7279199
by the way, it has been more than two months, where's the fix?
>>7279217
it's used now by several institutions

>>7278340
>5 institusions are currently using XRP (MoneyGram, Cuallix, FlashFX, IDT and MercuryFX).

>Many banks are currently using xCurrent. Since xRapid is cheaper (saves up to 60%) and provides final settlement, they are likely to transition to it.

>Bichip will use XRP in its RFID chips.
There's a product called xRapid that uses XRP. Look it up. It will be used for P2P payments too by millions. Look up Interledger : >>7278443

>>7279246
roger, please go

>>7278510
That's nothing, imagine what sharding will do. BTC can't beat that will the LN. And the great thing is VB is pro BCH.

>>7279306
he also picks his nose and wipes it on the wall on livestreams so i wouldn't give his opinion too much weight

>>7279262
>it's used now by several institutions
It's not used though, Ripple pulled a PR stunt.

>>7279199
The attack would slow things down a lot but transactions would still go through. It'd still be faster than Bitcoin ironically enough. Just wouldn't be instant anymore. Hence its not a security issue. A dos attack on a distributed network large and sustained enough to completely destroy a network is simply not possible. And if it was then someone would have already margin shorted nano and done it themselves. Also i bought in at $2 so I've got nothing to lose either way. Stay mad you son of a bitch besterd

>>7279122
post of the day. spot on.

>>7278865
hmmm... so a theoretical attack that could happen a year from now... that the devs are working on preventing.

>>7279271
Good argument

>>7277993
>>7278025
>>7278426
>>7278510

>cashcucks so desperate to bump thread on a pajeet erc20 shilling forum for recognition of their shitcoin

sad thing is this thread has probably got more network volume than bcash today

>>7278485
>There are tens of thousands of banks around the world and they have different owners
so why aren't you using banks you fucking retarded faggot? The point with Bitcoin is that that trusted system is not good enough, if you think it's already good enough why the fuck are you in crypto?

>>7278733
>they have no ability to do work.
wrong, they do work too

>>7279329
something like 3 guys own 50% of the worlds wealth, are you seriously arguing that if the wealthiest people decided to use bitcoin as a store of value that it would be worthless because the other 99.99% broke as a joke losers that inhabit the globe don't use it to buy coffee?

get a clue, bitcoin is not for niggers, is not for poor people, bitcoin is for the wealthy of which are tiny minority in this world

>>7279328
no it wouldn't

and if you get a large portion of the network offline, you need a much smaller stake to do a 51% attack


>>7279367
>that could happen a year from now

it can happy in anytime, even now.

>>7279490
how could one year of precomputed accounts of a botnet happen to a shitcoin that no one cared about until a month ago?

Do you believe in time travel?

>>7279457
A store of wealth that can lose more than half its value in under a month? Kek. Keep moving those goal posts to keep up with newer and better tech. So i suppose the lightning network is pointless then right? And the fact that satoshi himself stated in the white paper that it was meant to be a digital currency used by the masses is also irrelevant, correct?

>>7279511
it's early days, it's in the process (9 years so far) of becoming a store of value

the rest of your shit is just appeal to authority, as if satoshi was infallible, who gives a fuck what he claimed bitcoin is meant to be and instead focus on what it is - for the 1% on those on the ride side of the bell curve which excludes 99% of the population, and that's the cold harsh truth and required understanding in order to succeed in the world that is to come.

>>7279490
>no it wouldn't
Not an argument.

The 51% attack thing is a meme. Even if it was possible to knock off most of the network for a sustained period of time, which its not, in order to execute the attack you'd need a massive amount of nanos, and in doing so they'd lose all their value. Congrats on playing yourself again pajeet. You're good at one thing at least.

>>7279559
not infallible i mean, let him speak for himself if he disagrees, he doesn't need faggots like you and ver to interpret for him

>>7277810
We dont ned another bitcoin tinfoil hat fork. Noone needs his stupid coffe transaction written in petabyte blockchain database running on enterprise hardware. Deal with it finally.

>>7279393
>so why aren't you using banks you fucking retarded faggot?
I do use banks. But Bitcoin is better because it is decentralized. You implied there wouldn't be enough nodes from distinct entities to ensure the network was secure and that is distinctly false.

>>7279559
>instead focus on what it is
An unusable shit coin that doesnt do a single thing better than most other shit coins, much less second and third gen coins. A shit coin whose sole reason to exist is first mover advantage and name recognition.

>>7279584
>But Bitcoin is better because it is decentralized.
by your own admission Bitcoin Cash is never going to be any more decentralized than the banking system, so I ask you again, why the fuck are you in crypto?
>You implied there wouldn't be enough nodes from distinct entities to ensure the network was secure and that is distinctly false.
By your own admission there would be just as many nodes as compared to today's banking system.

>>7279601
it's too valuable to spend you daft kunt, especially on shit like coffee, fuck off andreas, i'd rather a few rich guys take up bitcoin than a few million broke ass venezuelans who have no fucking money to begin with

>>7279122
the bitcoin cash devs are actually interested in doing really cool shit to try to increase adoption, and they wanna do it without calling proof-of-work consensus into question and adopting crippled fucking lightning network side-chains and ultra-centralized nodes
with the same mindset of a communist who wishes to achieve a perfect society by simply pretending that they've already accomplished it, bitcoin core aims to increase transaction volume by bypassing proof-of-work—and in the process, they compromise the entire thing that gives bitcoin real value and that makes it so secure
if you can't understand this, then i confess that i just really don't care and feel that you probably aren't worth the effort to try to win over

>>7279678
adoption by WHOM? they pitch it to normans but normans are not interested, normans have no money, therefore it is doomed to fail, same goes for lightning, it will go unused as there is zero demand, but death of LN won't spell death of bitcoin where as it is death for bcash because that's its entire value proposition.

>>7279678
you can bash bitcoin everyday, but bitcoin developers deliver quality code, your bcash deliver Roger and stupid memes and dreams which has every 2nd altcoin developer

>>7277810
>Bcash thread again
Kek

>>7279566
dumb pajeet doesn't realize that some attacks don't care about direct profit (e.g., competitor, government, ..etc)

dumb pajeet doesn't realize making the network unsuable would evaporate the makret cap

dumb pajeet doesn't realize his shitcoin is useless anyway because it's a special version of a proof-of-stake where the top holders (founders) can manipulate the network however they want

>>7279717
>adoption by WHOM? they pitch it to normans but normans are not interested, normans have no money, therefore it is doomed to fail
With fees of around 1 cent per transaction you don't need normans to buy it. You build financial apps that use BCH for transactions and since its transactions are so cheap and fast you move other people's dollars, yen, pounds, renminbi, euros, etc. through BCH without the normans knowing they are using it. NChain is investing in a lot of startups doing just that, like Centbee.

>>7277810
It's not bitcoin =shit
It's that simple mate. If I wanted I coin that is not btc I certainly will never pick bcash

>>7279566
Oh it's not is it? Carry on then brainlet

>>7279953
But if you read the whitepaper you would know that BCH is the Bitcoin that was promised. It's time to make Bitcoin Cash again. Get these communist Bernie and Hillary fags out of here.

>>7278141
citation needed, leaning towards you're full of shit.

>>7279979
The name is more important than almost everything else. It's just how the world works

>>7280008
>The name is more important than almost everything else.
Then how the fuck did Bitcoin get its name. Please, just try to explain. Was it magic? Or was it the technology behind the coin? What do you think?

>>7280008
Yes value is a social construct and is not dependent on anything

>>7279773
> bitcoin developers deliver quality code

https://www.ethnews.com/lightning-network-users-report-losing-bitcoin-due-to-bugs

>>7280043
Because there is social consensus. There is no objective with decentralized systems. That's why 99% of ppl in crypto call bitcoin, Bitcoin and they call bcash cash. You have to be severally austistic if you don't recognize that literally every exchange lists bcash as BCH, which is a fork of Bitcoin.

>>7280174
>it wasnt that satoshi designed peer to peer electronic cash that made bitcoin successful it was because he called it bitcoin

>>7279401
Meaningless work that can be compared to a leech.

>>7277810
This whole BTC vs BCH thing is like pajeets fighting over which shitting street is the best

>>7280257
BCH's goal is to reclaim the 95% dominance over the next 5 years.

>>7280174
>You have to be severally austistic if you don't recognize that literally every exchange lists bcash as BCH, which is a fork of Bitcoin.
Only because the price of BCH is lower. When the price flips it will be called Bitcoin. What will flip the price is the tech. The fact that you literally use names to determine what investment to make says bad things about your investing strategy. All I can say is good luck in the next cycle, you're going to need it.

>>7280340
needed to happen in the first 5 hours, that you'd say 5 years with a straight face just shows how out of the loop you are with this stuff

>>7280393
>needed to happen in the first 5 hours
Are you joking? You're saying that 5 years is too long? That's literally one bear to bull cycle. One cycle.

Bitcoin Cash is a Korean commerce banking conspiracy to try to take over Bitcoin and thus the crypto market. They made their play hoping that they would be the real 'flippening', and they're still hoping for that, and as you can tell by this thread, still propagandizing about it.

If you want Korea to control crypto, then buy Bitcoin Cash.

>>7280419
if it was gonna happen, it would've already (in the proceeding hours after the fork).

it's analogous to saying you can change the result of the 2016 pres election and set yourself a goal of 2021 to complete it by - you just look retarded, there's no undoing it, you lost, bcash lost, and some accept it sooner than others, the later to their detriment.

>>7280370
>What will flip the price is the tech
Theres coins with better tech than bcash. So why would bcash be the one to flip?

>>7280370
>When the price flips it will be called Bitcoin.
"When"

Lol

>>7280611
btc genesis block. the only thing bch is missing is fungibility. everything in crypto is copyable except the bitcoin blockchain

>>7280655
BTC is digital gold.

>>7280611
>So why would bcash be the one to flip?
It's the only blockchain planning on being run with industrial grade computers, not desktops. It's not fucking rocket science.