(((Blockstream)))

[Anonymous No.10985100]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BZoKH-hX_o

[Anonymous No.10985120]

>>10985100
Xrp will be the standard very soon. Its everytime more decentralised and top speed and cheaper transactions.

BTC is old tech, chinese centralized, high energy consumer, slow and spensive trasactions.

[Anonymous No.10985126]

miners allowed blockstream to do what they did.
if taking over the github was all you needed to o to hamstring bitcoin it was doomed from the start

[Anonymous No.10985216]

Yeah I really don't get the NPC's on here defending segwit...

[Anonymous No.10985301]

>>10985120
xrp wont be the standard soon cause no one wants a shitcoin that was minted out of thin air, issued by a private company where the top still controls more than 60% of the supply.

if you think anything other you are fucking retarded.

[Anonymous No.10985313]

>>10985120
Cripple will be dead in a year.

[Anonymous No.10985328]

>>10985100
keep crying loser consensus always wins

[Anonymous No.10985359]

>>10985328
no because only miners get to decide, and currently theres like 4 miners which control 51% of the network

[Anonymous No.10985378]

>>10985359
no one cares about your stupid opinion. also no one wants to use a network where miners get to decide everything. also miners didn't get to decide, so stop this bullshit you stupid fucking retard.

[Anonymous No.10985419]

>>10985359
Lmao. Keep dreaming.
Users pay for security through inflation. Users can choose a new algo if miners start getting annoying. Go back to your plebbit circlejerk.

[Anonymous No.10985493]

Blockchains don't scale, period. Faster blocks means more orphans, which obviously doesn't help scaling, bigger blocks means less decentralization by sacrificing backwards compatibility and raising the bandwidth threshold. You could argue most miners can handle a few mor MBs, but that is NOT a long term solution if we want/expect bitcoin to gain mainstream adoption. You can't get 1k tx/s by raising the block size, it's a dead end, so why even start down that path? Pre-funded lightning channels are perfectly viable for 99% of bitcoin transactions. Unless you are moving hundreds of bitcoin, you are wasting block space with your puny .5btc transaction. Core sacrificed the present in exchange for the future, while bcash sacrifices the future in exchange for the present, but only one is viable long-term. Before you call me a shill, watch the Roger Ver vs. Johnny Lightning debate, where Roger clearly says he supports segwit and lightning channels. I get the feeling /biz/ doesn't actually understand how blockchains work... and yes, .01btc has been deposited into my account

[Anonymous No.10985512]

>>10985493
your are dumb and your are stupid

scaling meme can be solved by having epochs, but we are literally 50 years away from the point where we need anything.

[Anonymous No.10985571]

>>10985493
Oh I almost forgot, that pic is the current lightning channels on mainnet, at about $600k and growing every day. The more it grows the more stable it becomes, and the more stable it becomes the more it will grow. The argument that only banks will run lightning channels is pure fud. Bitcoin clawed it's way out the trenches of the internet, and that's where most of the bitcoin reside, with the drug dealers, hackers, general criminals, early investors and successful traders, who have hundreds of millions of dollars waiting to fund lightning. These people will not KYC you, they will simply open channels and profit from your small transactions. And it's no wonder why miners support bcash, they want all transactions on chain because they don't want lightning milking their cash cow. But bitcoin belongs to everyone, not just the miners, and the on chain block size remains 1mb.

Now watch brainlet cashies call me a corecuck without providing any coherent rebuttals whatsoever. In any case, I couldn't really give a fuck because bitcoin will simply take off without you

[Anonymous No.10985595]

>>10985512
>your are dumb
>your are stupid
Nope, that's bait

[Anonymous No.10985618]

>>10985595
I can see, the normies like you kind.

[Anonymous No.10985698]

>>10985493
>Faster blocks means more orphans
yeah but the Phantom Protocol says it's not an issue

[Anonymous No.10985704]

>>10985618
>>10985698
Can't tell if trolling or actual brown skins

[Anonymous No.10985727]

>>10985493
>You can't get 1k tx/s by raising the block size, it's a dead end, so why even start down that path?
Presuming that we will have the same hardware/bandwidth in years to come.
I have nothing against LN, you do have your points, but it's a new technology without any guarantees it would work/people would use it, and trying it out in the name of BTC is risky as fuck. It should have been the backup plan, not plan A.

[Anonymous No.10985824]

>>10985727
>without any guarantees it would work/people would use it
Like everything else in bitcoin, the only assumption that is made is that the discrete logarithm problem is hard, everything else is 2+2=4. And if it offers instant and cheap transactions users will move toward it, while those with lots of bitcoin sitting around will open channels to earn passive income. It's a win-win for everyone accept the mining cartel

[Anonymous No.10985862]

>>10985493
the problem is, core completely fucked bitcoin and the entire crypto space reputation for no reason. it could have easily been avoided by increasing the blocksize to 2MB and buying themselves another few years, without little consequence, to figure out lightning before scaling becomes a problem again.

But no. They didnt. And now more merchants are actually stopping accepting bitcoin instead of new ones starting to accept it.

fuck core. I dont even care for bcash. Its just fucking annoying that core is the main reason this whole party stopped and we came crashing down as soon as, and as hard as we did. Its also the reason we may never reach ATH again since the reputation of the entire space has been pretty much ruined by the $50 fees

[Anonymous No.10986018]

>>10985862
>core completely fucked bitcoin
Fees were high for a few months as the bubble approached it's peak. Core saw past that, looking towards the future rather than dwelling in the present. Last I checked, fees were under a dollar, not at all completely fucked. They didn't need to buy years, only persevere during those few months.
>merchants are actually stopping accepting bitcoin
Internet drug dealers still primarily accept bitcoin, and they are the ones that matter as their volume eclipses legal purchases. Some are accepting XMR, but ringCT is even harder to scale and theres also liquidity issues...
>core is the main reason this whole party stopped
No, what happened is the natural life cycle of a bubble. Big money doesn't just ram it's way into a new asset class, it has to come in waves, accumulating when people are frightened and dumping when people are auspicious. Although I'm very certain hedera hashgraph will be the mainstream ledger, while bitcoin and monero hold down the dark web. Everything hashgraph is doing is conducive to mainstream success, from the consensus algorithm to the SEC-approved crowdsale to having a fucking goldman sachs boi as their CEO. In the end I think bitcoin will remain where it started, in the dark web

[Anonymous No.10986053]

>>10985824
increasing the block size would have been a pretty safe solution at least for a short time. Stuff like LN should be tested out on altcoins. LN is too much to handle for people who bought their first BTC and the results in January was just an utter disappointment by normies who just concluded "cryptos are not read yet for mass adoption".

[Anonymous No.10986100]

>>10986053
Segwit, and subsequently lightning, did hit alts first. Litecoin is basically a bitcoin testnet, and it won't be too much for people to handle, wallet devs will take care of that. In the same sense you don't have to understand TCP/IP in order to use facebook

[Anonymous No.10986137]

>>10986053
also, normies don't drive the market, they are just passengers on the ride. Whales move the market, they drive it up to get normies buying and then sell into that liquidity before driving it down. Liquidity is the name of the game, and that's why the bubble burst, not tx fees. The demand was exhausted and so began the distribution. Classic Wyckoff market cycles

[Anonymous No.10986191]

>>10985100
Get on the CASH train

[Anonymous No.10986660]

>>10985571
Hey can you send me some bitcoin? I don't have any bitcoin, therefore no channels, and cant interact with the network. I'm not able to host a node online with 100% uptime.

No sane person would spend money to fund a strangers channel, without them funding the other end. This will probably lead to stagnant growth.

The fundamental design of LN is flawed, as liquidity is limited per channel, and will never achieve mass adoption. Nodes are an entirely new attack vector, and can easily be taken offline by DDOS, or funds can be stolen from the node itself.

If we want to achieve mass adoption we need better alternatives than what already exists. LN is not that.

LN will never save Bitcoin. Payment channels are nice, and have usecases, but the world economy cant run on it 100% due to its flawed design, both in usecase and security.

[Anonymous No.10986698]

>>10985100
Blockstream hijacked the project and made it all shitty and complicated.
It's fine though, it will become a boomer coin for etfs. Anyone who wants progress can move to alts.

[Anonymous No.10987894]

>>10985216
Npcs fall for psyops very easily fren

They are sleeper agents