Shill me this coin

[Anonymous No.57592598]

What is its purpose and can I make money off of it this bullrun?

[Anonymous No.57592621]

>>57592598
its literally bitcoin but without the retarded fees

[Anonymous No.57592645]

BTC for poorfags who can’t afford a $10 fee, basically only usable in third world shitholes like Brazil

[Anonymous No.57592661]

>>57592645
>basically only usable in third world shitholes like Brazil
even 4chan and e-hentai accept bch

[Anonymous No.57592672]

>>57592621
So what I’m getting is if Bitcoin decreases its fees, then there’s no reason to invest in its competitor

[Anonymous No.57592674]

>>57592598
like bitcoin, but useful.

[Anonymous No.57592686]

>>57592621
Created by Roger Ver in 2017, now mostly abandoned
Takes like 1% of bitcoin hash rate to completely kill off the coin

[Anonymous No.57592693]

>>57592598
It's called BCASH.

[Anonymous No.57592697]

>>57592686
Oh shit so it’s an abandoned project?

[Anonymous No.57592841]

>>57592693
BCH is also a good long-term asset. I'm looking at this and a few other assets like XTP, LTC, ETH, FET, and Manta for the long term.

[Anonymous No.57592887]

>>57592697
not really. but they pivoted in the ethereum direction. it's all about smart contracts and tokens and nfts and defi these days.

[Anonymous No.57592899]

>>57592887
look up "cashtokens" if you don't believe me!

[Anonymous No.57593317]

>>57592672
you can also mint tokens and give them away with also no fees

[Anonymous No.57593322]

>>57592686
you cant kill bitcoin, or bitcoin cash

[Anonymous No.57593346]

>>57592672
problem is they have to raise the blocksize to do that
something they have thoroughly convinced eachother is a bad thing
>>57592686
roger ver didn't create it lmao
he does prefer it to btc though

[Anonymous No.57593439]

>>57592686
>Takes 1% of the hashrate to completely kill off the coin
Yet it hasn't happened, or even seriously been attempted.
Bitcoin miners have no reason to attack BCH, since their profits come from SHA256 coins (ie all Bitcoin forks), not BTC specifically. Imagine if you owned a gold mine and a silver mine, would you send your metal miners away from your gold mine to attack your own silver mine? Makes no sense, not only are you losing the income of your silver mine, but also the time wasted by the gold miners, suffering damage on your silver mines and creating loss of investor/internal confidence in your own mining operation plus a loss of confidence in the broader silver market.

[Anonymous No.57593699]

>>57593439
easy to debunk this smooth brain take.
if miners make more by attacking a network than what their hashrate share would be expected to pay out, they should.

so let's say you have a 1% bitcoin miner, their expected revenue is 3500 btc annual pretty much. that's only $175 million.

bow if they can successfully short bch with 100x leverage with only a few million$ before or just as they attack, they can make many times that. the attack ensures the value of those coins drops like a rock on the moon.

mining hardware is depreciating continuously. it's not a forever cash cow. gotta be mindful of time preference.

[Anonymous No.57593733]

>>57593699
What about the other miners that don't want to lose a future (possibly unending) revenue stream? They'll step in to raise the hash rate. The cost quickly escalates beyond 1% of the BTC hashrate. It's completely unpredictable what the cost would actually be.
So again, why haven't they done it yet?

[Anonymous No.57593793]

>>57593699
>someone tries to blow up your silver mine
>you simply let them
this is the real smooth brain take

>>57593733
exactly

[Anonymous No.57593795]

>>57593733
no they will step out, because when you get continuously reorged you don't make any money you just waste energy.

you have to understand miners don't make any significant revenue from a shitfork like bch. in fact the attacker leaving the bitcoin network temporarily increases their profitability there.

[Anonymous No.57593805]

>>57593793
it's not a silver mine tho. it's more like a dung heap you can collect a bit of methane from.

[Anonymous No.57593838]

>>57592598
when it was launched, one could make good money on it. but you had to be quick, since btc holders got an equal amount of bch (exchange fake holders excluded) one could sell their free bch coins for BTC, and I did, not sure how much I made, but it was substantial, so thanks forkcoins, give me more forkcoins.

[Anonymous No.57593847]

>>57593795
just think for a second about what you're saying here
if you were correct it would have happened already
you even understand the economics behind the fact that this makes btc more profitable to mine, increasing the attackers (opportunity) cost in the process

[Anonymous No.57593885]

>>57593847
it can happen any moment. that is why sharing a fraction of bitcoin's hashrate is retarded.

i think miners are just really lazy and dgaf. they are more focused on getting cheap electricity and low variance than pulling out heists.

but that can change any time.

[Anonymous No.57593922]

>>57593885
Miners are impartial economic actors and you expect them to become emotionally motivated like yourself
These are publicly traded companies we're talking about

[Anonymous No.57593926]

>>57593885
i guess the most dangerous sitation when a significant sized mining operation has a liquidity issue and is tethering on the bring of bankruptcy. at that moment pulling out a heist and making bank short term trumps any long term consideration or laziness, since they are fucked and would be out of business.

[Anonymous No.57593965]

>>57593926
Then they have even less time to pull it off and other solvent miners have more motivation to protect their alternate revenue streams

[Anonymous No.57593971]

>>57593922
i don't expect them to be emotionally motivated no. this is pure rationality. you just make baseless assumptions.

[Anonymous No.57593986]

>>57593971
You're the one expecting a deviation from the nearly decade long norm
I'm simply reasoning about why this hasn't happened

[Anonymous No.57593989]

>>57593965
doesn't take a long time. that's not a problem. starts paying out pretty fast. and nobody has a motivation to protect 0.01% of their revenue that may or may not exist 2 years from now (as the relative valuation keeps going down the toilet)

[Anonymous No.57594012]

>>57593986
like i said probably laziness. the block reward was high and bitcoin made mad gains and they were able to find abundant cheap energy. the miners were fat and happy.

[Anonymous No.57594024]

>>57594012
>probably laziness
Nice assumption

[Anonymous No.57594130]

>>57594024
the way miners talk about their operation is they are just trying to make things to be as smooth and predictable as possible. it's like a well oiled machinery and they are trying to reduce the unexpected externalizes to almost nothing.

so they are starting to play with energy hashrate and price futures to completely hedge their operation. that costs way more than what the entire bch network makes. it's several percent of their revenue from btc.

[Anonymous No.57594215]

>>57594130
BCH is a hedge to their operation.
Also BCH has never had stronger fundamentals than it does today, CashTokens/ABLA are massive improvements, you can even see the BTC pairing gearing up for a reversal on the weekly timeframe. The BCHG NAV has detached from spot price. With the coming bullrun I wouldn't expect to see miners going bankrupt. It's looking very positive for BCH right now.

[Anonymous No.57594243]

>>57594215
no it's not. it's trending to zero against btc. they don't even bother to look at it.

[Anonymous No.57594305]

>>57594243
I don't think it's going to flip BTC or anything but you're retarded if you can't see the bchbtc chart looks primed

[Anonymous No.57594320]

>>57594305
>the bchbtc chart looks primed
Can you explain how / why

[Anonymous No.57594340]

>>57594320
higher lows on the RSI since 2022
it's finding support on 2022 lows
if it pumps from here the 120 MA could turn to support for the first time in its history

[Anonymous No.57594469]

>>57594340
>He's right
Fuck it, good enough for me lol

[Anonymous No.57594792]

>>57594340
good shit
it always bothered me how much hate bch has gotten, we're all here to make money

[Anonymous No.57595668]

>>57594305
i think once you fall out of the top 10 you are doomed. it's game over.

remember when bsv was in the top 10? jesus... now nobody gives a flying fuck. it's over.

[Anonymous No.57595741]

>>57595668
Maybe, but Bitcoin Cash is the only coin in existence to survive both a "minority" fork (BTC) and "majority" forks (BSV and XEC). Most other major coins have had 0 contentious forks, a couple have had 1 (BTC, ETH), no others have had 2 let alone 3.
It's done pretty well all that considered, and now they're all kind of on the same page. I think that's partly why development has picked up so much recently.
I was actually pretty bearish on it myself until the posting here got me to take a second look.

[Anonymous No.57595934]

>>57595741
they did a very decent work on the VM. bitcoin is a fucking stone axe in comparison. we are arguing endlessly about re-enabling fucking string concatenation and the dangers of it in 2024.

luddites have taken over the bitcoin social discourse. they are retarded af too.

but i think bch just overall lost the game. the market dgaf about losers.

[Anonymous No.57595955]

>>57595934
Yeah, BTC has had what? 2 updates in 6 years? If you think it's over for BCH, I hope for your sake you're right.

[Anonymous No.57596009]

>>57595955
i think at the right moment the bch folks can try to fork bitcoin again. and this time win the hash war.

there are two important things: utxo fork has to be recent enough that the big money that bought into bitcoin feels involved, and you can't touch the difficulty adjustment!

if the fork fails, try again until it succeeds! eventually bitcoin is going to become unusable for almost everyone. custodians will keep rugging people. sooner or later sanity must return.

[Anonymous No.57596026]

>>57596009
so basically bch is a testnet for the bitcoin that will come. best case... worst case it's just going to zero and never gets a shot.

[Anonymous No.57596033]

>>57596009
What would be the point of forking BTC here? All the BCH people already left, and the reason they did it when they did was to avoid all the segwit tech debt. It's better to just continue developing BCH imo.

[Anonymous No.57596230]

>>57595741
BTC had more than one. Bitcoin Gold is one example.
>>57592672
I mean BCH has much better tech like faster block propagation, 0-conf, Schnorr Signatures, CashFusion, soon ABLA and no SegWit (SegWit sucks) but at the end of the day, if BTC fixes the fee problem, I don't see anyone caring much about all that.

[Anonymous No.57596242]

>>57596230
I meant contentious hard forks. I don't think anyone knew about BTG until it was already forked lol.

[Anonymous No.57596254]

>>57596242
Sorry, I just noticed that too.

[Anonymous No.57596333]

>>57596033
you either fork btc with a hashrate and economic majority properly or it's just gonna be one of those worthless tings nobody cares about.

[Anonymous No.57596335]

>>57596230
The thing is blackrock has it written that they'll determine what keeps the BTC ticker. I don't trust they're going to pick the fork with lower fees if it happens because it poses a risk to the banking system. That's what killed BCH last time imo, it was the exchanges siding with the small blockers.

[Anonymous No.57596419]

>>57596230
why are you saying segwit sucks? it kinda makes sense. ofc you can live without it as well. it's ok i guess.

[Anonymous No.57596440]

>>57596335
more like the soft fork side has a huge home-field advantage against the hard fork side.

[Anonymous No.57596585]

>>57596440
Sure, but the ticker is arbitrary and it makes a huge difference.
Regardless, I don't expect any future claims to the throne to have any more success than BCH has had thus far.
There's a lot more that goes in to this than just hardforking and changing what it is you want to change. There's years of propaganda to unwind, more possible future splits from subcamps, you need a new brand and governance structure, address formats, replay protection, dumping will happen for years after the fork, you fracture your network effect, need new forums (bye r/Bitcoin), confusion among those who aren't keeping up with the discussion, and much more.
BCH is already years ahead in terms of these problems, and while all this chaos is happening BCH would be continuing to develop the entire time.

[Anonymous No.57596736]

>>57596585
change only happens if the bitcoin holders are unsatisfied. let's say fees go into the $100 to $1000 range, would bitcoin hodlers be okay with that? would core have an answer to that problem?

[Anonymous No.57596741]

>>57593317
with BTCDragon you can earn btc reflections passively for holding the token....

>>57593322
yeah right

[Anonymous No.57596755]

>>57596736
I think they will be ok with it, yes. Everyone is aware it's going to happen, that's why "hodl" is a thing.
You don't need to move your coins, do you anon?

[Anonymous No.57596806]

Is there any hope for a BCH etf or is that a pipe dream?

[Anonymous No.57596816]

>>57596806
It's pretty much guaranteed since BTC has already been given the green light

[Anonymous No.57596881]

>>57596419
You can read this blog post from 2015, scroll down to heading 3 and the conclusion.
https://scribe.rip/the-publius-letters/segregated-witness-a-fork-too-far-87d6e57a4179
It also predicted the ordinals spam.
>>57596335
That's a complicated issue, I don't see Blackrock swimming against the tide so to speak and they'll just pick what's more likely to win but they also hold a lot of influence like stablecoins do on other chains.

[Anonymous No.57596898]

>>57596419
You can read this blog post from 2016, scroll down to heading 3 and the conclusion.
https://scribe.rip/the-publius-letters/segregated-witness-a-fork-too-far-87d6e57a4179
It also predicted the ordinals spam.
>>57596335
That's a complicated issue, I don't see Blackrock swimming against the tide so to speak and they'll just pick what's more likely to win but they also hold a lot of influence like stablecoins do on other chains.

[Anonymous No.57596940]

>>57596741
this is the hottest meme in the space right now.
1M MC incomming

[Anonymous No.57597211]

i tried real hard to some up with a bch redemption story...

i think the only option is if bitcoin gets turned into a proof of stake network with only token proof of work allowed (so that it's a soft fork) that is completely subservient to the ESG narrative like methane flaring and grid balancing.

all competitive forms of mining would be banned from the pos bitcoin (blocks produced don't get signed by validators so nodes ignore them) so that hash has to go somewhere.

if bch then can start a virtuous cycle of speculation price hike hashrate hike, it can become the dominant sha256d pow chain.

[Anonymous No.57597247]

>>57597211
BCH already has an ESG advantage over BTC in that, even at equal hashrates, more transactions are processed per unit of energy spent
Now that you mention it, they should really lean into that a bit harder kek

[Anonymous No.57597295]

>>57597247
that's not the EGS narrative. that says you shall not waste energy on securing a network that can be secured without it. at all. they want to ban proof of work mining but they might see the advantage of it in the mentioned circumstances that are obviously of positive environmental impact.

it's not a net quantity game for the ESG morons it's all about what you use the energy for and if you compete with consumers on the grid or help them stabilize the grid, or you going after stranded energy decreases the greenhouse emissions or increase it.

also bitcoin can do millions of tps as a monetary network so whatevs.

bch can only play the opposing side in this game.

[Anonymous No.57597337]

>>57597295
Can be secured with PoS, but not secured as well. PoS is a death sentence for Bitcoin

[Anonymous No.57597601]

>>57597295
>bitcoin can do millions of tps as a monetary network so whatevs
citation needed

[Anonymous No.57597875]

>>57597337
yeah. that's kinda the point. bitcoiners committing suicide with the help of blackrock this way is the one chance bch has to flip it.

[Anonymous No.57597892]

>>57597601
higher layers that still use the underlying asset as unit of account have practically unlimited tps.

lightning, sidechain and chaumian ecash systems are not limited by global consensus the way bitcoin block space is limited.

[Anonymous No.57598009]

>>57597875
that's a bit presumptive, another BTC fork could cause enough chaos, or even be vindicating enough for BCH, to let it take the lead. Hell, people could even just have enough of the stagnation and decide they'd rather have 175 BCH than 1 BTC or whatever the ratio currently is.

>>57597892
Assuming any of these can even be made work like they've been promised all these years, nothing precludes BCH from taking all the work done on lightning and others and integrating it themselves. The UX is so bad on lightning it basically forces 99% of people to use a custodial wallet anyway. I'm not surprised there's only like 6000 BTC in WoS.
Lightning's own whitepaper even calls for 100+ MB blocks to allow for the entire world to make 2 txs per year, and it's probably even more now since that was using 2015 population. Good luck getting the retards that bought into the small block cope all these years to go along with that, hard fork needed btw.

[Anonymous No.57598025]

>>57592598
Hardly, fun, ocean and kas making some real millionaires this bullrun

[Anonymous No.57598115]

>>57598025
>KAS
Israeli premined trash

[Anonymous No.57598127]

>>57592598
This green BTC reminds me of Kaspa all the time

[Anonymous No.57598132]

>>57598009
>Assuming any of these can even be made work like they've been promised all these years

they work alright.

>nothing precludes BCH from taking all the work done on lightning and others and integrating it themselves

correct. there is just not enough interest/demand to warrant such a move.

[Anonymous No.57598159]

>>57598127
this green btc reminds me of kaspa all the time except it doesn't smell like poo and doesn't have the same amount of degeneracy as 4chan but it has plenty of autism and the usual 4channers like myself i would rate 4channers as worse than kaspa users but not by much and i'm not gonna pretend that i'm not one of the biggest retards in this place so i guess we're not that different after all anyway back to kaspa i'll shill you some

[Anonymous No.57598311]

>>57598132
>they work fine
idk kinda looks like a centralized solution to me
1MB blocks were supposed to make us more decentralized bros

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/aba062

[Anonymous No.57598393]

>>57598311
that's literally a decentralized topology.

it's certainly not some mesh network routing wise rn. but the entire point of LN is it's permissionless to enter the routing game anyone can become a hub/lsp without a banking charter or other permission system it just needs capital/liquidity.

[Anonymous No.57598452]

>>57598393
Did you even read it? That paper states 10% of the nodes hold 80% of the BTC and it's a function its design.

Conclusion:
"Originally designed to allow for cheaper and faster transactions without sacrificing the key feature of Bitcoin, i.e. its decentralisation, it is evolving towards an increasingly centralised architecture, as our analysis reveals. In particular, many star-like sub-structures, whose centers coincide with the 'centrality hubs' revealed by the Gini coefficient, co-exist. These hubs act as channel-switching nodes and seem to emerge as an unavoidable consequence of the way BLN is designed: as a route through the network must be found and longer routes are more expensive (fees are present for the gateway service provided by intermediate nodes), any two BLN users will search for a short(est) path. At the same time, nodes (which can only create channels based on local information) have the incentive to become as central as possible within the BLN, in order to maximize the transaction fees they may earn
...
The tendency to centralisation is observable even when considering weighted quantities, as only about 10% (50%) of the nodes hold 80% (99%) of the bitcoins at stake in the BLN (on average, across the entire period); moreover, the average Gini coefficient of the nodes strengths is ≃0.88. These results seems to confirm the tendency for the BLN architecture to become 'less distributed', a process having the undesirable consequence of making the BLN increasingly fragile towards attacks and failures."

[Anonymous No.57598490]

>>57598009
>BTC stagnation
I have to look into this a bit more but damn

[Anonymous No.57598587]

>>57598452
Fuck you.

[Anonymous No.57598654]

>>57592598
its the real bitcoin and once NPCs actually do 5 minutes of research they will sell their shit BTC for actual BTC (BCH)

[Anonymous No.57598662]

>>57592672
BTC is slow as fuck, so no, BCH still beats it in literally every metric possible

[Anonymous No.57599941]

bumpa

[Anonymous No.57600400]

Ok seeing as people are actually on board with the coin, would it be worth
taking out loan to invest in it

[Anonymous No.57600444]

>>57593439
tell me a you're a newfag without telling me you're a newfag.
you're a retarded nigger newfag that's never heard of merged mining. almost all the big mining operations merge mine and only pay out what the miners are digging for. they instadump the side mined shitcoins on the market.
It's like it's all of you idiots first day in crypto. I bet nobody else in this thread has even mined before.

[Anonymous No.57600472]

>>57600444
finally someone that claims they know everything to explain why it hasn't happened yet
go on tell us why bch hasn't been 51% attacked into the dirt

[Anonymous No.57600488]

>>57600400
and this is retarded
don't take out a loan to invest in anything

[Anonymous No.57600579]

>>57600472
what could they possibly gain from forking the network? exchange fuckery? no and you know why? because miners don't trade. they put their exchange wallet addresses into their miner and a script to once a day market dump whatever they mine. miners don't give a fuck about the coin or the network. they only care about getting fuckin paid and how they can get an advantage over every single other miner on the network to make even more profit.
mine
dump
mine
dump
period
The only people that perform network fuckery are principaled anarcho communist retards that have poor hygene and roll their own cigarettes. most of those faggots are gone from the scene now that lambo chasing moonbois ruined crypto and turned into a speculative asset with ever encroaching kike regulations.
>t. former pool operator

[Anonymous No.57600586]

>>57600579
I'm pretty sure that's why the guy you were calling a retarded nigger was saying

[Anonymous No.57600689]

>>57600586
well I'm really high and hammering away at my keyboard. but he is a retarded nigger

[Anonymous No.57600693]

>>57600689
fair enough

[Anonymous No.57600741]

>>57600400
it's a good buy but like the other guy said taking out a loan to buy crypto has to be the dumbest thing you could possibly do