Not bait

[Anonymous No.18395845]

Can someone think of a single good long term FUD for the king?

[Anonymous No.18395872]

It won't reach 1 million next year but in 7 years.

[Anonymous No.18396567]

Impurities in the development process letting a critical bug slip in. No other coin has the same level of engineering resources as bitcoin but just looking at how previous critical bugs were introduced doesn't give me a lot of faith in the code review process

[Anonymous No.18396667]

[Anonymous No.18396685]

TETHER

[Anonymous No.18397075]

>>18395845
- 7 tps. No fucking way.
- Fully dependent on the Tether BRRRRRRRT to sustain its price.
- It does not have a path towards PoS. At some point, block rewards will be so low that the price has to rise astronomically to sustain it. This makes transaction costs even higher than now.
- It has no use case anymore except the greater fool theory.

[Anonymous No.18397099]

>>18397075
haha found the guy who does not own 1 bitcoin hahahaha

[Anonymous No.18397101]

>>18395845
It doesnt work as money.

[Anonymous No.18397216]

>>18395845
No roadmap for adoption.

[Anonymous No.18397217]

>>18397075
Despite what memers say scaling can mostly be solved by the LN. PoW is a strictly superior consensus mechanism. And fees will become much higher in the event bitcoin reaches massive adoption, but that will mostly be solved by the LN. As an experiment I think bitcoin could fail, but it would likely take most cryptos with it to the grave.

[Anonymous No.18397231]

>>18397216
Countries with failing currencies are starting to adopt bitcoin. That seems like a clear path to adoption for me.

[Anonymous No.18397315]

>>18395845
Bitcoin is only being used for margin trading. The only big holders that aren't retarded are exchanges. USDT issuer, Tether.to is a Chinese shell Taiwanese company that doesn't have a real office. Not a medium of exchange. Not a store of value. Etc.

[Anonymous No.18397329]

>>18395845
it's not the real BitCoin

[Anonymous No.18397405]

>>18397231
They're not adopting Bitcoin. They're merely using it as a hedge against their countries' inflated currencies because they've got no other options. If they have a choice to trade their currencies for other currencies (like USD), they would.

[Anonymous No.18397435]

>>18395845
Its hackable

[Anonymous No.18397459]

>>18397217
>Despite what memers say scaling can mostly be solved by the LN.
I'd like to remind you that years after introducing LN, it's network capacity is a joke at ~$10m

[Anonymous No.18397465]

>>18395845
cracking SHA256 encryption

[Anonymous No.18397506]

>>18395845
>manipulated as fuck, 0.1% of holders can decide its price
>can be easily destroyed in anytime (((they))) want, one tweet from trump about banning BTC and watch this shit go to 100$

make no mistake, the only raison btc still exist is because (((they))) are making so much money from it.

[Anonymous No.18397515]

>>18397329
fuck off, we're full.

[Anonymous No.18397521]

>>18397506
Bro we are (((((they)))))

[Anonymous No.18397533]

>>18395845
It has no intrinsic value and therefore is doomed to go to 0

[Anonymous No.18397537]

>>18397506
>>18395845

>trump tweet "BTC will be banned, americans money should go into DOW, not some china mined butcoin"
>btc -80%
as easy as that.

[Anonymous No.18397540]

>>18397435
Is it?

[Anonymous No.18397543]

Oh, I forgot: that shit is not fungible. It's easy for the orange man to censor addresses at will. BTC in those addresses are basically worthless.

[Anonymous No.18397547]

Currently, five pools, all Chinese, control 70% of the total hashpower. If they cooperated, they could force all BTC users, traders, holders, and exchanges to accept a hard fork that raised the block reward, and thus the 21 million ceiling.

Until now, that possibility was remote, for various reasons.

Mining has been generally profitable for the Chinese miners, even after each of the previous halvings.

There were enough pools outside China that could undermine the cartel's hashpower and thus cause such a "coup" attempt to fail.

The coup could cause BTC price to drop so much that the miners's reward would drop even with the increased reward. A large and skillful marketing effort would be needed to support the price, by convincing butters that the change -- "just once, just this time" -- was Good for Bitcoin.

And the dropping revenue has caused the non-Chinese miners to drop off before the Chinese ones, thus compensating in part the losses of the latter.

But now that even the most profitable miners have narrow profit margins at best, most of the hashpower is in China, and their total raw revenue will be slashed by half next month, maybe they will have no other choice...

Moreover, it is possible that many of them just spent millions on the new Bitmain mining rigs, and thus are in the deep red.

At some point between the two World Wars, Germany replaced the hyperinflated mark by a new one that was supposed to be pegged to gold. The peg was absolutely guaranteed by laws and promises over the bones of saints and by the beard of the Prophet. But eventually the government was unable to maintain the peg, and devaluated the mark again...

[Anonymous No.18397553]

>>18395845
Also it already got media attention, normies who bought got burned and no greater fool is buying our bags

[Anonymous No.18397578]

>>18397465
Bitcoin is the least of your worries when this happens.

[Anonymous No.18397652]

>>18395845
>good long term FUD for the king?
halvings are traumatic events that can send it to a death spiral. it didn't happen the first 2 times but this one looks bad the greatest depression, falling markets, money fleeing risky investments whales shake out longs people cashing out to buy toilet paper and reward halving all at once.
that's about it.
>>18397075
you can send about 20 thousand tx/s on a single lightning payment channel. i think you could easily have a few million of those at once.
that's a few 10 billion tx/s.

[Anonymous No.18397678]

>>18397465
That still won’t break it actually. Both symmetric key encryption and sha256 secure bitcoin. Both would need to be broken. Also bitcoin double hashes so its even harder to break even if sha2 was broken. If both were broken you could still hard-fork the network when before they were both broken. However I’d say the experiment simply failed at that point.

[Anonymous No.18397682]

>>18397459
decades after introducing ipv6 to solve the ipv4 scaling issues still almost nobody is using it.
these things take time networks must mature and be adopted on their own momentum find their own efficient shape and structure by trial and error.
ln works even if routing doesn't work yet. direct payment channels are already incredibly useful for micropayments.

[Anonymous No.18397690]

>>18397506
its decentralized. The government can’t ban it

[Anonymous No.18397720]

>>18397547
You can’t force a hardfork afaik. If you break protocol then your block is invalid and will be rejected by normal bitcoin nodes

[Anonymous No.18397736]

>>18397678
>Both symmetric key encryption and sha256 secure bitcoin
more like sha256+ripemd160 hides the public keys and makes them quantum proof.
bitcoin doesn't use symmetric encryption in it's security model.

[Anonymous No.18397749]

>>18395845
If Bitcoin reaches 1M per coin, the transaction fee will also rise to 1000 USD per transaction.

[Anonymous No.18397782]

>>18397578
the worst part that we would only know about it years later, hell it could be already cracked by some NSA server

[Anonymous No.18397797]

>>18397690
>can't ban it
you can't be serious anon,can you?

[Anonymous No.18397800]

>>18397736
>bitcoin doesn't use symmetric encryption in it's security model.
Oh I meant asymmetric lol

[Anonymous No.18397813]

>>18397782
as far as bitcoin is concerned the "cracking" or weakening the security of sha256 doesn't really matter this usually means second preimage attacks becoming realistic and extension attacks on say executable assemblies so you can't use the hash anymore for signatures. this has happened to sha1 md5 and a lot before.

bitcoin pretty much immune all to that by default.

[Anonymous No.18397825]

>>18397720
>You can’t force a hardfork afaik.
Of course you can, all you need is 51% of hashing power. Whether the new fork is accepted as the dominant fork or whether users stick to the traditional code-base is less clear. But it is possible to fork in a way that causes a death-match and that will be won by hash-power.

[Anonymous No.18397850]

>>18397825
Only thing you can force is fragmentation. The people in the network will in the end choose which fork they want to use.

[Anonymous No.18397851]

>>18397540
If the hashrate drops low enough, yes.

[Anonymous No.18397864]

>>18395845
If bitcoin had been released as a finished, flawless protocol its leaderless design would be an asset, but because it's an experimental work-in-progress, its lack of formal ownership (superficially its greatest selling point) is actually its greatest weakness. Hierarchy is inevitable, and power over bitcoin is no exception. If bitcoin is not controlled by transparent power, it is necessarily controlled by hidden power. Objective authority which does not have to be formalized, that is, power which is allowed to remain hidden, tends toward corruption, and worse, ineptness, as it never bears responsibility for its mistakes. The fork wars demonstrate bitcoin's inability to incorporate meaningful upgrades uncontentiously and are chiefly due to lack of formal authority. This does not mean cryptocurrencies require centralized trust, but rather that their development and maintenance do. The trend among second generation coins is clear: on-chain governance. Bitcoin will never have this and might well die because of it.

There are also potential economic pitfalls to its design. If bicoin manages to survive to its fabled zero block reward sometime in 2140, will transaction fees be enough to incentivize sufficient hashrate to secure the network? Is proof-of-work ultimately secure? Does hashrate have to grow continuously and sufficiently along with global hardware production to mitigate potential alternate history attacks if and when new hardware is brought online maliciously? Bitcoin is an experiment and these answers are only revealed as the experiment unfolds. It's done well so far, more than a decade of security. But statistically, this doesn't tell us much beyond its potential to survive but another ten years.

[Anonymous No.18397870]

>>18397682
>these things take time
18 months right? Bitboys are just grasping blindly in the dark for any way to justify their delusional fantasies.

[Anonymous No.18397871]

>>18395845
their scaling solution can be brought to a halt with the cost of less than half a btc
>https://medium.com/@ayelem02/congestion-attacks-in-payment-channel-networks-b7ac37208389

[Anonymous No.18397903]

>>18397870
what about the 20 years ipv6 failed to catch on? almost everybody on this world is still using ipv4. i usually disable the ipv6 stack on my network cards because shit is buggy and routing is a bitch on double stack.

[Anonymous No.18397929]

>>18397864
Good post

[Anonymous No.18397935]

>>18397903
>what about the 20 years ipv6 failed to catch on?

Let me explain this to you cuz it's pretty simple. Nobody is using lightning because right now, bitcoin is below maximum capacity (Roughly 2 MB with segwit). If bitcoin's blocksize ever peaked at 2 MB and demand increased the blockchain would grind to a halt like it did last time. No one is going to switch to lightning. They're going to sell their bitcoins and forget about this pointless projects.

[Anonymous No.18397937]

>>18397903
still i have no doubt in the future ipv4 will be gone and ipv6 will be the standard. eventually it will happen. when the need is real. when the tech is mature. when the world is ready to adopt.

some fags are so impatient.

[Anonymous No.18397947]

>>18395845
No more suckers left to buy your ponzi bags?

[Anonymous No.18397951]

>>18397935
>No one is going to switch to lightning.
rofl who knows i think it will catch on, but you can't rush these things. real adoption comes with need. nobody needs bitcoin where people can afford it yet.

[Anonymous No.18397957]

>>18397864
Based

[Anonymous No.18397963]

>>18397951
>rofl who knows i think it will catch on

>it will catch on
No, it won't. Let's keep it real. No one is excited about lightning. And you act as if bitcoin HAS to be the one to succeed. If bitcoin fails some other project will pick up the pieces.

[Anonymous No.18397968]

>>18397825
I think you mean softfork then. Hardfork means you’re breaking protocol and requires changing the nodes. You can only change the block reward amount if you hardfork.

[Anonymous No.18397977]

>>18397935
I used to be bullish on lightning but it really does seem like something is going wrong. There's some technical problem that they're stuck on. Development is not happening as fast as it should.

[Anonymous No.18397998]

>>18397947
This and china is the most legitimate FUD. I didn’t want to spoil the thread by giving away the answer though. Its likely this fad could die off. I don’t think it will, but it definitely could.

[Anonymous No.18398108]

>>18397963
>No, it won't. Let's keep it real. No one is excited about lightning.
that's just like your opinion you try to sell as fact.
>And you act as if bitcoin HAS to be the one to succeed.
it's the only real crypto so far. the only one that has the properties of real crypto the only one that is a real gamechanger. i would like to see it gain more adoption indeed.
lightning is again a game changer but comes with a price tag.
layer 1 is trustless and permissionless and secure
layer 2 is trustless and secure not permissionless because it's known efficient form is very centralized as of yet

this can change with multi path channels and or ring signature type shielded pool central liquidity routing. bu as is lightning works best with a maximum of 2 hops between endpoints.
but the current layout of the network is a full mesh. so we are very very far from it be efficient. these things take time.

but for people not being excited about ln is willfully retarded. bitcoin was an awful payment system for irl purchases and instant miropayments before ln. it was fucking good for sending millions of dollars oversees. it was the best for moving serious wealth. i fucking love it compared to wires. but bitcoin without ln is not a competition for my credit card. and no 0-conf is full pants-on-head retarded.

[Anonymous No.18398177]

>>18397998
I think we need to stop using the term fud, fud is a disinformation tactic used to scoop up cheap coins. I believe we could categorize your pointe as legitimate concerns?

[Anonymous No.18398184]

>>18398108
Creator of lightning network
>LN is not a silver bullet for btc scaling

Bitcoiners
>hurr durr LN solves all our problems

[Anonymous No.18398188]

>>18395845
(1) it's quite obviously a number agency creation
there are declassified NSA papers going back to the goddamn 1990's outlining blockchain technology
(2) point (1) is strengthened immensely by the fact that BTC has a goddamn SECRET INVENTOR (seriously, how is that not the biggest red flag?) that hasn't moved almost 1 mio. fucking coins in all those years

take (1) and (2) and lets hypothesize: why would a number agency keep all that money and not use it? its obvious that satoshis coins moving would completely annihilate the market instantly, so cashing out is literally impossible now. well if doing *anything* with the coins would instantly tank the market, then maybe that fact is WHY the coin was created in the first place - imagine you are the financial elites "bodyguard"/robber knight (CIA). what would be a better job at making sure that banks aren't threatened than to pool most money of people that want a DECENTRALIZED currency together and then tank it all literally on the click of a button?

point (1) is indisputable for anyone that actually looks into blockchain technology history - and as soon as you grasp that secret agencies are not here for but against us and for the banks, you'll realize that they have monopolized decentralized assets in BTC and can vaporize every cent invested in that decentralization in an instant. and they will. BTC's chart will unironically be very similar to bitconnect (going to zero overnight).

[Anonymous No.18398308]

>>18398184
it's not a solve everything solution it's a solve micropayments efficiently with minimal global burden also make irl retail purchase possible in a trustless secure NON CUSTODIAL manner.
it also has insane theoretical tx/s.

[Anonymous No.18398508]

>>18398308
How about we don't kneecap the network with small blocks just so some Mongolian basket weaver can run a node on his dial-up connection? How about we stop pretending that Bitcoin can accommodate the lowest common denominator and simultaneously scale to mass adoption? How about we stop pretending that average users are going to run nodes? How about we stop pretending like the Chinese mining oligopoly hasn't already edged out the competition? Despite cores best efforts to cuck the network in the name of decentralization, Bitcoin mining is incredibly centralized; a handful of nodes broadcast basically all the blocks, and it works because those miners have invested millions into hardware and infrastructure; how about we remove the block limit so then maybe users can actually use Bitcoin again?

[Anonymous No.18398547]

>>18398508
>How about we stop pretending that Bitcoin can accommodate the lowest common denominator and simultaneously scale to mass adoption?
we have no choice but to wait and see. to me it makes sense so far but about time to star addressing future scaling. the blocksize has to be increased gradually preferably naturally with demand.
one single hardfork that makes max block size self adjusting and allows miners to forgo say 1 sat per byte from block reward to include more tx than the 100 moving average soft limit.
hard limit would be 2 power megabytes by halving so currently 4mb soon 8mb.

something like that...

[Anonymous No.18398599]

>>18398308
>layer 2 is trustless and secure not permissionless because it's known efficient form is very centralized as of yet

Layer 2 isn't very secure. That's why it's only used for micropayments.

>insane theoretical tx/s.

Transactions still need to be settled on the BTC chain. The lightning network is only advantageous if two parties frequently do business. If it's an irregular or one-off thing, there's no advantage to using the lightning network.

[Anonymous No.18398605]

>>18395845

as in BTC?

Consensus in regards of scaling. Or not scaling.

We've all seen the shitshow that happened during any bitcoin split. BCH/BSV was the worst, as there was no clear winner. there's guaranteed to be disagreements whenever a blocksize increase is under debate again, and you will have one hardcore brainwashed group that wants to reduce blocksize to 300kb. I believe that most likely, to not splinter the community further, this would be avoided at all costs. I have no idea, but trying to talk to maxis about even a 2x increase gets you banned on r/bitcoin, so seems like any blocksize increase will be fought hard against.

Anyway, at this current level, Bitcoin is not able to handle enough payments to have any viability other than a science project. 7 tps is not enough for a global payment system. Others will win unless something happens to the scaling plan. (if one exists lmao)

LN is not a viable solution imo. LN isn't "BITCOIN" but most people jump to this whenever scaling under debate. The result would be a hub and spoke system with known institutional hubs, that knows your identity, and collects fees to manage your LN node. LN is too complex for a newbie to just use out of the box. you'd need an always online node, with funds locked in a channel with another party with enough channel liquidity to reach your destination. due to this, higher payments are really unlikely to be accepted through the network, unless you have a channel directly with merchants. This would again lead to a hub and spoke system, where in general, liquidity is low, so you just open a channel directly to the merchant, and the merchant makes money on the transactions that goes through their highly connected node.

If you don't understand how LN works exactly watch a few videos by "Decentralized thought" on youtube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOZaLbUUZUs

By Rick Falkvinge:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzaEd2RQuRw&feature=emb_logo


Right now there's more BTC on ETH.

[Anonymous No.18398672]

>>18397690
they can make any fiat on ramp like coinbase illegal and say they facilitate money laundering and tax evasion
Sure, the remaining lolbertarians who started BTC will continue to trade underground amongst each other, but you can kiss any hope of institutional inflows and normie money goodbye, price wouldbe lucky to remain above $1000

[Anonymous No.18398703]

>>18397851
that doesn't mean a hack retard

[Anonymous No.18398705]

>>18398547
It's almost like Monero is the real Bitcoin...

[Anonymous No.18398785]

A Carrington like Event could wipe out technology in 100 years.

[Anonymous No.18398997]

>>18398605
anyway, if the solution is just as easy as increasing the blocksize, It's already been done, and BTC has been beat. Might have a higher price than BCH and BSV, but it is no different to what these have already done. BCH is already building a huge network of merchants and storefronts, like the early days of BTC, before 2017, where we lost Microsoft, Steam, and any other potential serious merchant for the future.

BTC isn't a hedge, as some people say. At least not right now. if it were a hedge against the dollar, you'd be able to use BTC as a dollar. BTC can never really get to that level. first of its the insane TX fees, (Which could be solved in the future) but also the fungibility of the dollar. if you recieve a Bitcoin from your friend, try to send that to a bank, and you're arrested by the police because you've recieved a stolen bitcoin. your bitcoins can be flagged, and be linked to illegal activities, and would therefore be worth less than a newly mined bitcoin. 1 BTC does not always equal 1 BTC.

XMR solves the fungibility problem. BCHs Cashfusion somewhat does this, but you'll always have some problems when it comes to "optional privacy" as it would be a lot easier to break it.

BTC is a meme. Could be improved by increasing tx throughput,but this is something that will not be easy, as over half of the BTC "userbase" is brainded Maxis that think that sitting on their asses doing nothing will make them billionaires because NUMBER GO UP!. the reason number would go up is because demand go up. why demand go up?

U T I L I T Y
T T
I I
L L
I I
T T
Y Y

if the only demand is number go up its purely a get rich quick scheme.

use it.

OOPS I CANT BECAUSE ITS OVER A DOLLAR TO TRANSACT ON THE FUCKING THING. HMMM BETTER GO USE SOMETHING ELSE. WHOOP DEE WHO COULDVE SEEN THIS COMING?

BTC will die unless its get off its shitstained ass and does something.

RANT OVER

[Anonymous No.18399002]

>>18398997
fuck messed up utility ohh well. laugh at the newfag

alt 255 my ass

[Anonymous No.18399057]

>>18398997
The reason why shitcoins will never be adopted is because is it sets a self defeating precedent where only the latest and greatest blockchain will be used.

[Anonymous No.18399112]

>>18399057

ehh. the so called "network effect" is what matters/defines adoption. BTC has the biggest right now. but due to its limitations, the network activity is capped, and can't grow much bigger than what it is right now. If any shitcoin gets more adoption than BTC, it will beat it.

[Anonymous No.18399457]

Ask peter schiff

[Anonymous No.18399950]

>>18397405
>because they've got no other options.
That sounds like adoption. If Bitcoin ultimately succeeds as a world reserve currency, it won't because most people like the idea and proactively want to use it. It will be because they are forced to.

[Anonymous No.18399969]

>>18395845
>Muh store of value that drops 50% in 24h

[Anonymous No.18399971]

>>18397405
>hedge against their countries' inflated currencies
>like USD
would you trade your gold for usd?

[Anonymous No.18399995]

>>18395845
Once all coins are mined, there will be no incentive for miners to continue operating the blockchain

[Anonymous No.18400064]

BUMP keep going I'm comfy

[Anonymous No.18400078]

>>18400064
I read this entire thread every comment

[Anonymous No.18400213]

This thread just goes to show how low the collective biz IQ is.

No shit coin is comparable with Bitcoin which is superior in almost every aspect.

The only legitimate weakness of Bitcoin is its fungibility and the potential for 'tainting' and tracking of coins. Current heuristic analysis of the blockchain is a futile endeavour in any case as it can only blacklist addresses to certain degrees (or risk tainting virutally all Bitcoins in existance).

Bitcoin is worthwhile for speculation if it captures the SOV status for digital currency (there is a strong argument it already has). Monero is useful as a MoE but will never be worthwhile speculating in over Bitcoin. The entire usecase for smartcontract based crypto is tenuous over centralised databases.

[Anonymous No.18400269]

>>18400213
My thoughts precisely. Fungibility is the main concern, assuming that scaling is eventually solved.

[Anonymous No.18400321]

>>18395845
The truth is always the best

80% of Bitcoin mining is pooled in china with 57% from Sichuan alone. All the ASIC miners are made in china.

The CCP could shit on it any day now. they already hate that it is being used for capitol flight and banned it. the last man standing in china is the mining farms.

People do not trust Chinese play on that

[Anonymous No.18400339]

>>18400213
>The entire usecase for smartcontract based crypto is tenuous over centralised databases
you had 3 years

[Anonymous No.18400443]

>>18397537
How do you ban bitcone? I don't mean DUDE JUST SHUT DOWN EXCHANGES, I'm asking: on what legal basis could the US ban bitkorn?

[Anonymous No.18400451]

>>18400339
?

I bought $4 ETH in 2016, held to $1000+ and sold at $700 on the way down. Not ideal but infinitely better than the lost opporunities from being locked up in shitty link for a laughable 20-30x over 3 years lmao.

[Anonymous No.18400464]

>>18400213
> The entire usecase for smartcontract based crypto is tenuous over centralised databases.
>This thread just goes to show how low the collective biz IQ is.
Funny and >>18400339

[Anonymous No.18400479]

>>18398605

Anon has high IQ

The part regarding Bitcoin in Ethereum is deep. I also agree that Wrapped BTC will be the future of BTC if it even has any.

only a fool would say bitcoin will die but its future will be determined by arbitrage into Ethereum's scaled up DeFi system since it can handle the TPS needed.

desu nothing is wrong with bitcoins current tps if we intent to view it as digital gold. Actual gold is also hard to move and scarce. I am of the camp that Bitcoin does not need to scale it only needs to survive.

It will however likely take the same roll as gold in our economy where Ethereum holds most of the market cap. we should all remember the value of gold is insignificant compared to nation's GDP

[Anonymous No.18400505]

>>18395845
centralized mining and development

[Anonymous No.18400509]

>>18400479

Why does 4chan keep replacing random works with desu? at first i thought it was a auto correct but no this is a fucking conspiracy bros

WHYYYYYY DESU IS Everywhere

[Anonymous No.18400520]

>>18400505

Second

POS is the only way to fight Chinese ASIC's and mining farms

[Anonymous No.18400521]

>>18400464
Stinker spotted. The stench that is emanating through my screen is most unbearable.

Tip: Don't succumb to to the sunk cost fallacy, one needs to have the discipline to cuts its losses when its no good. This is coming from someone that bought ETH at $4 and sold at ~$700,

[Anonymous No.18400533]

Centralized and Chinese government controlled.

[Anonymous No.18400545]

>>18400521
>This is coming from someone that bought ETH at $4 and sold at ~$700,
Yea yea, appeal to authority larper. Post receipts or fuck off nerd

[Anonymous No.18400550]

>>18395845
Chain death spiral is always a possibility

[Anonymous No.18400555]

>>18400213
don't inputs for UTXOs eventually get cleaned if the chain gets long enough since their oldest merkle trees get pruned, thereby cleansing "dirty" transactions, mixers work, or if the chain gets long enough UTXOs which contain dirty inputs eventually get clean

[Anonymous No.18400568]

>>18400509
it's t b h senpai

[Anonymous No.18400580]

>>18400520
that or subsidizing electricity for mining operations

[Anonymous No.18400595]

>>18400545
Just look at the IQ on this guy.

>Quotes a post with the implication they bought stinky linky's 3 years ago
>demands proof when responded in kind.

[Anonymous No.18400713]

>>18400568
so desu is desu?

[Anonymous No.18400733]

>>18400521

ur right that chainlink is a scam but I bought btc in 2010 and i do not brag. it hurts the simps feelings and drives them into the welcoming arms of Sock puppets and shills

[Anonymous No.18400773]

>>18400580

mining is pointless in the first place.

Vitalik deserves a nobel for coming up with pos slashing. Its going to save the economy trillions in electricity costs that would have been dumped into mining.

[Anonymous No.18400803]

>>18400773
where do the funds that reward stakers come from, i actually know very little about PoS

[Anonymous No.18400866]

All FUD goes out the window when you realize not only are a majority of normies completely fucking stupid but the first coin they think of when they think about cryptocurrency is "bitcoin". Anyone you talk to on the street that even knows what crypto is only knows bitcoin, with a small number of them knowing about one or two of the top 10 coins typically ETH or more commonly known as "that one that looks like a couple purple triangles"

What I'm getting at is if there's another cycle all of the money will be flowing into BTC. And likely people who've been holding BTC will be trying to cash out into other methods. Either in actual fiat or potentially alts with the EXPECTATION of an alt season.

[Anonymous No.18400868]

>>18400443
Threat to U.S. financial interests, safe haven for black markets

[Anonymous No.18400954]

>>18400713
f a m
s o y
Not sure if there are more

[Anonymous No.18401023]

>>18397547
Retarded goldbug. Look up the venlo incident. Churchill's peace offer to Germany had only two conditions:
>kill Hitler
>Germany back on the gold standard
International Jewry was pushing the gold standard because it let the jews practice usury unlike Nazi Germany's barter and labor-backed currencies.
>What are barter and labor-backed currencies and why are they better than muh shiny rocks?
Say Brazil has 100 tons of coffee they want to trade for 100 German tractors. With the gold standard, Brazil has to go to a jew-run bank in order to raise the cash to buy the tractors, which they then offset MINUS THE (((INTEREST))) with the proceeds of selling their coffee. Germany similarly has to go to a bank to raise the cash to buy the coffee which they then offset MINUS THE (((INTEREST))) by selling their tractors. The jews get their cut coming and going.
Nazi Germany implemented a barter system to cut the jews out. A Brazilian cargo ship carrying 100 tons of coffee would dock in Germany and be given "trade credit" equal to the value of their cargo, which they then spent on buying 100 German tractors and sailing back to Brazil. Because the "trade credits" were not loaned, but rather bartered, there was no interest and no parasitic middlemen.
As for labor-backed currencies their superiority to shiny rocks is much simpler. You could take your gold-backed jew-money and exchange it for some shiny rocks that do nothing. Or you could take your labor-backed currency to the German government and exchange it for a whole work crew of German men to work and build and produce for you. The difference between the two systems is clear. The gold standard is for extracting wealth from a nation and giving that wealth to the jews. The labor standard is about creating physical wealth and plant in the nation.

[Anonymous No.18401198]

>>18395872
And by that time $1m USD will buy the same as $10k does today

[Anonymous No.18401206]

>>18401023
Okay so in your ideal system my silver (and gold) (that has actually uses contrary to what you typed) is not manipulated in price like it is now and would be worth historic levels of your prized labour. I don't have a problem with that at all.

[Anonymous No.18401225]

>>18400954
t b h

[Anonymous No.18401351]

>>18401206
Your silver and gold has industrial uses, but other than that no fiat value. Shiny rocks are the original fiat currency. You have to admit that unless you think that there is some magical force that gives those particular configurations of protons, neutrons and electrons inherent value over other configurations.

[Anonymous No.18401445]

>>18401351
Silver is the most conductive metal. Gold doesn't tarnish easily. Why do you think they are part of computers you fool? Those are the uses. Science. Quantum computing. ...

[Anonymous No.18401458]

>>18395845
Three transactions per second.

[Anonymous No.18401473]

>>18401351
>fiat value
This is any value decreed. Anything can have "fiat value" if so deemed. Metals have exchange value based on the utilities inherent in that "particular configurations of protons, neutrons and electrons." These utilities are industrial, medical, jewelry, but most important is they represent the best form of money. This ability to function as: medium of exchange, unit of account, portable, durable, divisble, fungible, and a store of value make muh shiny rocks superior to any labor theory of value currency. Your labor backed currency requires arbitrary price fixes by the government to conjure the price of the various labor, leaving itself vulnerable to all the pitfalls of price manipulations (shortages, misallocations).

[Anonymous No.18401474]

>>18401351
The reason they are worth what they are worth is because they are more rare than other (configurations) metals you find in the ground and because of their industrial importance.

[Anonymous No.18401480]

>>18397465
First, SHA-256 is not an encryption algorithm.

Second, the digest algorithm used for BTC can be easily changed in the protocol with miner consensus.

Third, your public key isn't even exposed until you spend from an address for the first time so a double-spend attack would need to take place in a very short amount of time between your broadcast and confirmation.

Fourth, let's say some nation state found a way to pool quantum computing resources to generate a particular hash in polynomial-or-better time. You think they'd waste that critical knowledge on Bitcoin? Fuck no, the second they did, the counterparty who got screwed with a double-spend would know about it and alert the community. Maybe it would cause BTC to crash, and maybe it would force a hard-fork using a different algorithm, who knows. Either way it's a trick that would only work a few times before word got out. Putin or Xi certainly wouldn't be blowing that golden load on fucking cryptocurrency of all things, there are much bigger fish to fry. Imagine if you could spoof hashes for all kinds of executable files like WinRAR and embed your own code. Let it spread around the world silently until the right time arises to activate your Godeye Botnet world takeover.

[Anonymous No.18401507]

>>18400803
Transaction fee's part of it is burnt to make Ethereum deflationary.

[Anonymous No.18401640]

>>18401351
Sorry for calling you a fool. I got defensive

[Anonymous No.18401736]

>>18401445
>Silver is the most conductive metal. Gold doesn't tarnish easily. Why do you think they are part of computers you fool? Those are the uses
Industrial uses is their only value, yes
>>18401473
>Metals have exchange value based on the utilities...These utilities are industrial, medical, jewelry
Yes
>but most important is they represent the best form of money. This ability to function as: medium of exchange, unit of account, portable, durable, divisble, fungible, and a store of value
Labor certificates also function as: medium of exchange, unit of account, much more portable than rocks, more durable as well, more divisible, fungible, and potentially a better store of value
I'll explain the better store of value part because everything else is immediately obvious. Labor certificates are potentially a better source of value for two reasons:
1. Technology which will make gold worth less (asteroid mining or some such)
2. Technology which will make labor worth more (every technological advancement so far has made labor more valuable)
But labor being a better store of value than gold is debatable so whatever. The main point is that any value ascribed to pms beyond their industrial uses is fiat/speculation based
>>18401474
>rarity = value
lol no. Their only value comes from their industrial uses and a cultural legacy of being government fiat dating back thousands of years. But that value given by cultural legacy of being fiat currency is no less arbitrary than the value given to USD by it being fiat.

[Anonymous No.18401800]

>>18401736
Based poster

[Anonymous No.18401815]

>>18401736
By the way just look up who were the intellectuals of the Austrian school. It's literally just a bunch of autistic libertarian jews trying to pump their bags of rocks while smarter cosmopolitan western jews moved onto fiat paper currency (as opposed to fiat rock currency) as a more efficient method of fleecing the goyim.

[Anonymous No.18402124]

>>18397935
>the blockchain would grind to halt like it did last time
complete bullshit. as long as blocks are mined, the blockchain doesn't "grind to halt".

[Anonymous No.18402171]

>>18398188
>there are declassified NSA papers going back to the goddamn 1990's outlining blockchain technology
sauce, pls

[Anonymous No.18402395]

>>18398785
Based.

[Anonymous No.18402635]

>>18400443
if they shut down exchanges this would be great. no more speculation means less price movement

[Anonymous No.18402769]

>>18395845
Cripled to 1mb. Fees in a 1mb block cannot payout miner. Thus no security.

[Anonymous No.18402876]

>>18400443
Same way they banned everything that's ever been banned. Make up crypto bad bullshit and shut it down. Duh.

[Anonymous No.18402941]

>>18402171
His ass

[Anonymous No.18404070]

>>18398599
>Layer 2 isn't very secure
it's using the same security as layer 1 and using layer 1 escrow it's just bulk settlement. very secure especially for you as you will only pay with lightning not accept payment via lightning.
businesses will probably use professional watchdog services or payment providers as they need their income in fiat where their accounting and taxes and expenses are.
>>18398705
monero got some interesting ideas i give you that. but it's no bitcoin. for some reason people are less interested in things that make sense and their fantasy is moved by hard cap on total supply and first mover.

[Anonymous No.18404103]

Once the US sees it as a real threat they will just send in a few stealth bombers to take out all mining farms in hostile countries then force all US farms to 51% attack the network and send all bitcoin to the fed

[Anonymous No.18404838]

>>18401198
Based and inflationpilled

[Anonymous No.18404912]

>>18400479

Moving all transactions off to ETH would eventually compromise security, no? In 100 years, there are no block rewards, and every TX is on eth, so no tx fees for miners, hashrate would go down drastically, and double spending would be easy. You'd be basing the security on altruistic miners, which isnt gonna work long term.

Why not just use ETH at that point?

[Anonymous No.18404916]

>>18404912
Oh new IP. That was me

[Anonymous No.18404970]

doesn't scale
no devteam
more than half mining power is concentrated in china

[Anonymous No.18404979]

best FUD coming through:
new logo sucks, old one better

[Anonymous No.18405001]

>>18404979
Ok scronty

[Anonymous No.18405048]

>>18401480
thats a man

[Anonymous No.18405094]

Bitcoin is a 3x leveraged S&P end of the story.
Nobody wants to keep risky assets during a recession.
This is NOT a store of value.

[Anonymous No.18405259]

>>18401198
extremely woke

[Anonymous No.18405505]

>>18404912

The point is It will eventually get absorbed into Ethereum due to arbitrage meaning people would have more things to do with it in DeFi.

And yes this would kill it. Ethereum's Blockchain Economics will quickly devalue anything that is not a actual tokenized good or service.

it would still end up on ethereum unfortunately even tho this is its fate if it does

[Anonymous No.18405524]

>>18405094
>Nobody wants to keep risky assets during a recession.
I do

[Anonymous No.18406076]

>>18397864
not FUD
but I really appreciate the tough that was put into this post

[Anonymous No.18406501]

>>18397547
Imagine being this far behind the times

[Anonymous No.18407415]

>>18401198
So it's a perfectly safe store of value? That's good enough for me.

[Anonymous No.18407435]

>>18397547
You can literally establish an entirely different ledger in a 51% attack. I don't understand how that itself didn't kill crypto dead.

[Anonymous No.18407460]

>>18395845
We will need physical gold in the case of an EMP attack. Which will become more common as time moves forward and technological warfare advances.

BTC is not 100% bullet proof, however it will be the anchor between physical and digital currency in the near future.

[Anonymous No.18407464]

>>18406501
Eh it’s a copy pasta from reddit, I wanted to see what this thread had to say about it

[Anonymous No.18407475]

>>18405524
Well that's great then keep your 2k folio and watch it burning to 2 cents poorfag.
Only poor people keep money on risky asset during warning times.

[Anonymous No.18407503]

>>18404970
>doesn't scale
Relative, it has scaled itself physically to be the most widely distributed and most decentralized network in history AND paved the road for new crypto based world
>no dev team
Their github would suggest otherwise.
>centralised mining
True enough to be unfortunate but do not forget that this is fairly inconsequential since bitcoin node locations are the true drivers of centralisation and the largest majority, at roughly 20%, are based in the USA. With European countries making up the remaining majority

[Anonymous No.18407542]

>>18404979
based

[Anonymous No.18407997]

Quantum computing rendering most known cryptographic protocols moot.

[Anonymous No.18408024]

the blockchain size becoming too big for the average person to download and it has to be stored in mega storage centres leading to centralization of nodes and single points of failure

[Anonymous No.18408026]

>>18407475
What is safer other than PMs? fiat is being printed into worthlessness, the stock market is just hot air, real estate is about to get shoah'ed, start ups are on hold, oil is cratering, as well are most ag commodities. Wtf is left to throw money at for investment?

[Anonymous No.18408038]

>>18397459
This is absolutely not true. These are public channels. Every single wallet these days uses unadvertised private channels as a default.

[Anonymous No.18408137]

>>18397720
Biz has no clue how important nodes are. Just look at how link is the most shilled coin here yet guarantee nobody has gone to the github and setup a node. Nobody here actually runs anything. In btc there is a strong culture to run nodes, so its the just decentralized coin period. Even lightning which everyone fuds has more active nodes than most other coins combined.
If miners start fucking with the chain with doublespends, my node and all the others will not propogate their bad blocks. This means all you can really do with a 51% attack is reorder valid transactions a few blocks back, so you just have to wait a bit longer but btc still functions. If they release invalid blocks the nodes will cut them off and ban them automatically

[Anonymous No.18408173]

>>18395872

i'm thinking more like 12-16 years for that but we shall see

[Anonymous No.18408187]

>>18397075

low TPS isn't legitimate FUD noob

if you want a high TPS coin just use facebook coin, it's nice and centralized for you too

[Anonymous No.18408194]

>>18404979

extremely based

[Anonymous No.18408236]

>>18408137
yeah people think its minder that keep btc decentralized but the nodes are a huge factor too and its why in btcs future there could come a problem if the blockchain size is too big for average people to download and set up nodes and it has to be done in large data centres thus leading to centralizating unless storages become cheaper over time

[Anonymous No.18408247]

>>18408236
miners*

[Anonymous No.18408254]

>>18408137

lmfao link holders are retards, the fact that they don't understand nodes is the reason they will lose all their money kek

[Anonymous No.18408256]

>>18408026
I swear people here are just dumb. It's like facebook but only nerds here. Same IQ btw.
Do you know what bonds are ? Do you know that USD is right now pretty strong ?
Of course during a downturn everything go down but do you prefer 10% loss in two years or 80% in 2 weeks ?
Also the "brrrr" printed money is priced in as fuck. Even your momy scream this shit everywhere so stop being a sheep.
RETARDS

[Anonymous No.18408377]

>>18408256
The thing is the money printing/expanding M1 really isn’t that complicated. We went from dollar milkshake to maintaining the norm for now, but after the rush for liquidity is over the dollar will nosedive. And I assure you most of the population doesn’t think about this stuff. They simply don’t care about US fiscal policy even if its simple.

[Anonymous No.18408435]

>lmfao link holders are retards, the fact that they don't understand nodes is the reason they will lose all their money kek

[Anonymous No.18408645]

>>18408435

oh look damage control team is back again kek