Explain objectively

[Anonymous No.7614041]

I don't understand why nobody likes this coin. Literally is the working Bitcoin. The only excuses I hear are:
>Roger Ver is a scammer
>Bcash
>Lightning Network is coming soon (already working in testnet)
>Shitcoin only getting pump and dumped like crazy by whales

I'm trying to redpill myself from this but I just can't.
Help anyone?

[Anonymous No.7614061]

>>7614041
>speaking about yourself in the third person
You can’t hide, Roger

[Anonymous No.7614102]

>>7614041
Its a gift from heaven anon.
Why do you think It can keep these pricelevels? Because oldfags who made fortunes in BTC know its the real bitcoin.

All those FUD arguments are just redditors with tiny folios shitposting.

BTC will keep losing adoption and BCH will keep gaining adoption.

EOY either ETH or BCH will be top marketcap.

[Anonymous No.7614105]

Roger's jewish

[Anonymous No.7614133]

I agree and think most people are attacking the person and not the product, which is stupid

A factual argument against BCH might be that while they criticise BTCs method if scaling, They are yet to demonstrate their own method will work either.
>inb4 gigabyte blocks and graphene blah blah
Yeah it's possibly but not proven

Both are necessary to exist to provide scaling options and ultimately one may succeed. This is a necessary 'control' to BTC's hypothesis

[Anonymous No.7614134]

Rodger ver is a Chinese miner boot licker, was a shill for mt.gox, AND HES MAKING THE FUCKING FROGS GAY

[Anonymous No.7614183]

this is the face of bcash

>a guy that tried to pretend he was satoshi
>an ex con
>a douchebag looking faggot

[Anonymous No.7614196]

>>7614133
The important point is that even if gigablocks dont end up being implemented, you need to scale on chain until layer 2 is feasible and ready.

BTC literally choses to DIE and lose all IRL adoption until an unknown point in the future where layer 2 may be ready.

BCH can scale now and have payment channels later on when 32mb blocks start filling for instance.

That buys 2+ years of comfy developing while the network can grow. Something that should have been done on the legacy chain.

>>7614134
>hurr durr bcash is a scam because roger ver sold firecrackers and jihan wu is chinese

[Anonymous No.7614201]

>>7614183
>ex con
he sold fireworks on ebay you fucking baby kys

[Anonymous No.7614228]

>>7614201
this also how would it be bad if he actually sold something illegal (which he didnt)
This is crypto. Him not giving a fuck about daddy govmint is a massive plus.

[Anonymous No.7614235]

>>7614183
three washed up middle aged men desperately trying to cling to relevance through any means necessary.

i dont know whats more depressing, those three, or the hoards of people that will literally waste days of their lives trying to defend them and a bunch of chinks online.

[Anonymous No.7614321]

easy, beacuse this coin has one target, to be bitcoin, but until its bitcoin it has absolutely no value
and it is very unlikely that it will become Bitcoin thats why its very very ver risky to own any bcash

[Anonymous No.7614330]

>>7614235
BCH was already was a huge win for them brainlet.
They probably made a couple hundred million each already from it and they are far from done.

[Anonymous No.7614332]

>>7614183
He has proven he is Satoshi. Can you prove he is not?
>a douchebag looking faggot
>Ad hominem

[Anonymous No.7614334]

>>7614041
BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH
LOL BTRASH
Stay away from this Chinese scam. Lol. You see how many proof-of-stake coins are out there now? This is obsolete. Generation 1, energy-wasting shitcoin. Once you guys are using up all 32GB of memory and the block size increases, what then? Game over.
Lol. Deluded bcash shills. I might not like Blockstream, but it's the only way forward.

[Anonymous No.7614351]

>>7614330
yes, they're playing pump and dump games with a shitcoin, but they're only capable of taking money from speculators.

[Anonymous No.7614379]

>we should use it because it has Bitcoin in the name
absolutely fucking retarded logic
instead of just making a better coin with current technology they decided to fork it so it would get a instant spot in the top 10. say what you will about nano, but look at how it came out of nowhere based on it's tech alone. if all those guys got together, made a new coin, and shilled it with their influence maybe it would be worth checking out.
there is LITERALLY no other reason to use Bitcoin cash other than >muh it has Bitcoin in the name
prove me wrong

[Anonymous No.7614381]

>>7614196
What about mt. Gox? WHAT ABOUT THE GAY FROGS?

[Anonymous No.7614385]

>>7614196
>That buys 2+ years of comfy developing while the network can grow. Something that should have been done on the legacy chain.
I agree 100%
A workable solution today beats a theoretical better solution in the future. Especially when they need to increased blocksize at a later date anyway.

If BTC was a company the CEO and management would have been crucified. What they've done to the adoption rate is unforgivable

[Anonymous No.7614403]

>>7614321
Can you explain it further? I like what you're trying to say. I'm trying to understand it.
What I understood:
Aims to be Bitcoin (then kill it). With that premise, Bitcoin needs to have no value and that it's why it's not going to happen, ever.
But what I see is:
Yes, it aims to kill Bitcoin by trying to be a better Bitcoin. It's not going to happen in the short term because we are still in the mining and development phase. But in the long run, whales that have both BTC and BCH will keep BCH and sell BTC to buy more BCH.
I want to be wrong, but that's what I'm thinking.

[Anonymous No.7614408]

>>7614351
Investing millions into development and marketing, which they are doing, will prove much more profitable for them in the long run.

Its easy to to flame BCH right now, but BTC will stay slow and expensive and the longer it is the more brainlets will understand on.chain scaling is a must.

[Anonymous No.7614418]

>>7614235
>three washed up middle aged men desperately trying to cling to relevance through
Yeah dude, every man over 35 should just kill themselves. What's the point of doing things if you're not in your youth right? There's always someone younger and better than you and if there isn't then people will see you as that"old guy" who tries to hard

[Anonymous No.7614437]

>>7614379
>stolen 170M because of a code bug
I'm not paying for bad coded coins, but if you do and you're right, we will see in the end of this long run.

[Anonymous No.7614439]

>>7614041
I just hate coins that add "Cash" or some other bullshit like "Classic" to a coin...

[Anonymous No.7614517]

>>7614408
>Investing millions into development and marketing
This is also something that BTC supporters underestimate.
Simple trumps complex

If Roger keeps going to interviews with his 'cheap fast and reliable' upgraded bitcoin line he will eventually win people over. To defend that from a BTC perspective you need to sperg out and talk about nodes and decentralisation which is poorly understood by normies.
BTC position is much harder to defend even if their argument is technically better.

I think core devs have no understanding of business development or marketing and they need to wake up to this fast.

[Anonymous No.7614520]

Has this thread just triggered a pump?

[Anonymous No.7614563]

>>7614517
>BTC position is much harder to defend even if their argument is technically better.
Its so much harder to defend because they basically just promise to have something that works at some point in the future while BCH works now.

[Anonymous No.7614623]

>>7614041
Roger, just turn yourself in! Tyrone is waiting for you

[Anonymous No.7614630]

>>7614563
Exactly. But the price keeps going down and that means people are selling, so I'm not sure people understand or care about that.

[Anonymous No.7614646]

>>7614332
Citation needed.
Also if he is, have him move an original address publically

[Anonymous No.7614677]

>I like Bitcoin Cash (not Bcash, btw)

[Anonymous No.7614688]

>>7614630
Everything is going down. Thats good for BCH, the soon to come bitpay launch pump will take BCH even closer to BTCs marketcap.

[Anonymous No.7614699]

>>7614677
>scale it

[Anonymous No.7614703]

>Microsoft: "Some blockchain communities increased on-chain tx capacity (blocksize increases), this approach generally degrades the decentralized state & cannot reach the millions... we're collaborating on decentralized Layer 2 protocols that run atop 'BTC' blockchain to achieve global scale"

https://cloudblogs.microsoft.com/enterprisemobility/2018/02/12/decentralized-digital-identities-and-blockchain-the-future-as-we-see-it/

Microsoft has officially seen past the shitcoin scams and is working on the Lightning Network. You'll see Steam back soon making a similar statement.

You fucktards can still sell your shitcoins and become rich within the next 5 years by joining at the bottom (YES, the bottom) of the financial revolution.

If you aren't rich in 5 years you NEVER deserved to be so.

[Anonymous No.7614749]

Bcash is a shitcoin that you only buy when there's a pump imminent, so you can dump it on hopeless fools that were conned by the Bcash cult.

[Anonymous No.7614751]

>>7614703
If BTC is the way to go, why it has lost so much dominance? With that reasoning BTC dominance hould've go up, not down.

[Anonymous No.7614772]

>>7614703
If BTC is the way to go, why it has lost so much dominance? With that reasoning BTC dominance should've go up (or stayed the same), not down.

[Anonymous No.7614797]

>>7614749
Just remember to FOMO in when we hit parity corecuck

[Anonymous No.7614801]

FLIP IT ROGER

[Anonymous No.7614814]

>>7614772
New shitcoins come out all the time, each oe taking a small percentage. What are we at now, 1400? Besides, in a diverse market, you have a lot of uncertainty.
I like it cause it gives me a discount on btc. Sooner or later, shitcoins will start to get phased out

[Anonymous No.7614831]

>>7614797
I really see that happening, do I have low IQ? I always question myself about everything, but man, this is pretty much straight forward.

[Anonymous No.7614834]

>>7614801
BTC people used to love roger.
That is until Bildeberg starting pouring money into Blockstream and Blockstream accessories.

Really makes you think, huh?

[Anonymous No.7614852]

>roger ver is a scammer who doesn't care about decentralization
>tries to hijack the bitcoin brand because its just another fork without it
>Pumps the coin himself when BTC is dumping to prove a point
>He's a big crybaby and a total dick in interviews
>He works together with chinese miners to make them and him loads of money instead of being a non profit organization
>Pays for people to sockpuppet on reddit

BCH will be like 120 EOY, it won't make the flippening

[Anonymous No.7614888]

[Anonymous No.7614913]

>>7614814
Then why every non-BTC or non-BCH holder say so much about how bad being a Gen 1 coin is? We can't even get a single good coin having stable value, being cheap or fast... We had BTC but in December we saw the 1MB problem (solved already in August). The cryptomarket is a mess right now and I no longer know what to think anymore.

[Anonymous No.7614923]

[Anonymous No.7614931]

>>7614852
>instead of being a non profit organization
Bitcoin is libertarian faggot. Non-profit lel

Greed literally is what makes bitcoin work. Its essential to the protocol.

Bitcoin Core disregards free market forces and doesn't give a shit about the quality of its product, thats why its doomed to fail. The fight is already over.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jctc85X_PCI

[Anonymous No.7614976]

>>7614931
Don't be mad Bcash is trash, forked by only 20% consensus, and because the majority didn't side with you, you decided the only way forward is to claim Bcash is Bitcoin (defrauding newcomers) and spamming the network to support your own agenda.

[Anonymous No.7614980]

[Anonymous No.7614994]

[Anonymous No.7615008]

>>7614976
>Bcash is trash
nice arguments!

[Anonymous No.7615062]

Contrary to popular belief, BCH has always been open to 2nd layer solutions. Just not by sacrificing speed and cost of the entire system just to funnel profits into one company.

[Anonymous No.7615121]

>>7614834
No one has ever liked Roger, except Tyrone
>>7614913
Because people shill extra features
>>7615008
>>Bcash is Btrash
Fixed that for you
>>7615062
Nope, Roger is shilling on "muh Satoshi's vision" even though Satoshi-Sama talked about actively making improvements to the system, and changed the block size personally

[Anonymous No.7615146]

>>7614041
I'm all in on BCH. The amount of superficial criticism here on the personality behind it and not it's product is a comfort.

BCH is in a better position to grow regardless of who "wins" out in the market cap dominance. By solely looking at ROI and not the ethics within crypto, more people should be in BCH.

[Anonymous No.7615211]

>>7615146
Perception is reality, or chain link wouldn't be the shittiest shit coin that ever was

[Anonymous No.7615231]

>>7615121
corecuck shill, the post

[Anonymous No.7615284]

>>7615231
Roger just turn yourself in already. Tyrone is waiting for you in prison

[Anonymous No.7615324]

>>7615284
thanks for bumping

[Anonymous No.7615329]

>>7614183

Not a single argument provided, kill yourself shill.

[Anonymous No.7615430]

>>7614831

No you're not stupid. You're obviously seeing past the paid shills and fearful corecucks who sold their coins for next to nothing in August lol

BCH will reach parity soon enough, BTC is a shitcoin. Bitcoin's (BCH) adoption is growing rapidly, the price is only this low because the market is full of retards who haven't actually realised BCH is the real bitcoin, when the revaluation occurs it will be sudden and sharp.

[Anonymous No.7615491]

>>7615430
>My adoption is constant and sharp, and I do not hope for bigger blocks for anyone. In fact, I want my use-cases to be inflicted on others.

[Anonymous No.7615533]

>>7614041

One reason: they have invested in BTC already.

It's emotional. Nothing more to it. I saw this when I sold all my BTC and got free from the shackles of emotional bias.

[Anonymous No.7615549]

>>7615491

>0.02 rupees have been deposited in your account

[Anonymous No.7615560]

>>7615430
I bought BTC in August to have BCH. I'm so glad I did that and didn't sell my BCH. Thank you, now I know I'm not crazy, just need to be patient.

[Anonymous No.7615603]

The problem of scaling has a long term aspect and a short term aspect. A one-time permanent solution would be great but we don't have now, so why not implement something now to mitigate the problem in the short term while people continue to develop a long term solution? This seems like it's just basic common sense. Why do we see entities like Microsoft shitting on any approach that doesn't immediately fix it for good (even though they don't have a fuctional fix either)? It seems hypocritical and stupid.

[Anonymous No.7615643]

>go to bitcoin.com
>at first glance it seems like a newb friendly site for bitcoin
>slowly but surely the cashie shilling gets uncovered. newbies think they're buying bitcoin but they get bcash
absolutely disgusting. what a jew

[Anonymous No.7615655]

>>7615560

The fact that you're seeing more and more threads about BCH is evidence enough, and the fact they're full of spam bots spreading low level FUD is even more promising.

I remember when I bought my BCH back in August for ~$300 a pop I'd jump on /biz/ and there was hardly any discussion about BCH, now there's several large threads daily.

In a few months from now Bitcoin (BCH) will be forking to upgrade again and I expect the price to explode upward to it's real value.

[Anonymous No.7615701]

>>7615603
Imagine what would've happened if BTC had 8MB blocks in December. The price would've skyrocket (even more) and I'd probably wouldn't sell my BTC @$18k.

[Anonymous No.7615702]

People don't like it because BCH was started by the banks to make BTC lose its threatening position over the banks while they accumulate more BTC.

[Anonymous No.7615739]

>>7615655
Explosion will start when bitpay rolls it out.
Pretty hard to deny its usefulness when 20-30k online shops have BCH in checkout. Add to that everybody using coinbases new checkout will have BCH

[Anonymous No.7615754]

>>7614041
Publicly co-opting the bitcoin brand to confuse normies.
Imo good companies make their own name instead of riding on the popularity of the brand they are co-opting

[Anonymous No.7615773]

>>7615701
This!
Bubble could have gone to 50k+ if bitcoin was still fast and cheap. Why arent more coiners blaming Core for this? They are directly responsible for us not reaching 1T marketcap.

[Anonymous No.7615786]

Someone explain to me why this is better than litecoin?

[Anonymous No.7615802]

>corecucks fail to realize jihan makes up 50 percent of btc mining
And when he switches it will be glorious

[Anonymous No.7615829]

>>7615786

1. Litecoin is a shitcoin pump & dump (ask charlie)
2. Litecoin is not bitcoin
3. Bitcoin (BCH) is Bitcoin

Kill yourself for asking such a stupid question, shill.

[Anonymous No.7615848]

>>7615802
This is the best part. BTC shills will simultaneously hate on Jihan and praise BTCs superior security in the next sentence yet that security stems directly from based miners such as Jihan.

[Anonymous No.7615851]

>>7615773
see >>7615702

[Anonymous No.7615853]

>>7615829
I was told litecoin is technically better than bcash because it's faster and cheaper in the long run.

[Anonymous No.7615957]

>>7615853
>it's faster and cheaper
No need to thank me, guys!
(But if you really want to send donations to 3LLZz50BiteMyKikeAssIIV3)

[Anonymous No.7616020]

>>7615786
Litecoin has 1MB blocks. But I can agree that it's faster than Bitcoin just because it has 2.5 minutes per block and 4x the marketcap (easy fix to the time per block). Adoption to Litecoin would drive Litecoin to the same dead end Bitcoin is.
>I like Litecoin

[Anonymous No.7616126]

>>7615853

>bcash

Who told you that? Your kike overlord or the supreme pajeet at the sweatshop?

Anyone who calls Bitcoin Cash bcash is clearly a paid shill, kill yourself please.

[Anonymous No.7616166]

>>7614041

Why does nobody like it?

>Roger ver as front man
>Tries to be bitcoin through misinformation rather than merit
>big blocks are more centralized and they don't scale well either. Even eth doesn't scale well and it's light years beyond BCH
>toxic supporters that are always hostile when you don't want to support their fork
>rips on btc but just a copy of the source code anyway
>shilled as a currrency, but supporters are mostly late adopters that just want to see their coin go up to the real Bitcoins value. Otherwise the price might as well be $1

It's a shit solution and just a desperate attempt to steal the brand

[Anonymous No.7616194]

>>7614041
all good arguments

[Anonymous No.7616349]

>>7616166
ANd what "merit" does BTC have exactly?

[Anonymous No.7616382]

>>7614041
>>7614061
>>7614102
>>7614105
>>7614133
>>7614134
>>7614183
>>7614196
>>7614201
>>7614228
>>7614235
>>7614321
>>7614330
>>7614332
>>7614351
>>7614379
>>7614381
>>7614385
>>7614403
>>7614408
>>7614418
>>7614437
>>7614439
>>7614517
>>7614520
>>7614563
>>7614623
>>7614630
>>7614646
>>7614677
>>7614688
>>7614699
>>7614703
>>7614772
>>7614797
>>7614801
>>7614814
>>7614834
>>7614852
>>7614888
>>7614913
>>7614923
>>7614931
>>7614976
>>7614980
>>7614994
>>7615008
>>7615062
>>7615121
>>7615146
>>7615211
>>7615231
>>7615284
>>7615324
>>7615329
>>7615491
>>7615533
>>7615549
>>7615560
>>7615603
>>7615643
>>7615655
>>7615701
>>7615702
>>7615739
>>7615773
>>7615786
>>7615802
>>7615829
>>7615851
>>7615853
>>7615957
>>7616020
>>7616126
>>7616166
>>7616194
>>7616349
Nice (arguments)!

[Anonymous No.7616383]

>>7616349
If BCH is a shitcoin that makes BTC even worse, and I'm being objective here.

[Anonymous No.7616400]

bcash is so bad that not even microsoft likes it

https://twitter.com/innvtv/status/963234210927427585

[Anonymous No.7616405]

>>7616383
If bitcoin is so shitty, why the fuck do you want bcash to be bitcoin, bshill?

[Anonymous No.7616525]

>>7616405
Bitcoin Cash can have 8x the transactions per block which makes it a useful Bitcoin fork. Also, without the bottleneck we had with BTC we wouldn't had those high fees either.

[Anonymous No.7616542]

>>7616525
>>7616400
this guys a liar, read my post

[Anonymous No.7616582]

>>7616525

already know what you're gonna say

>“Microsoft are part of the conspiracy against us” - BCH Community.

[Anonymous No.7616584]

>>7616525
Still worse than %90 of the coins, the "bitcoin" part in the name doesn't justify it.

So if I fork bitcoin and make 100mb blocks, it's 100x better than bitcoin and it's better than bcash. Would that make my bitcoin shit the real bitcoin ?

[Anonymous No.7616592]

>>7616400
M$ talking about how decentralization is bad is like the banks talking about how BTC is used to fund terrorism.

[Anonymous No.7616611]

>>7616525
By that logic, even fucking turtlecoin is the real bitcoin.

[Anonymous No.7616623]

>>7616542
Microsoft have been wrong many times. They adopted Bitcoin early and they stopped supporting Bitcoin payments not long ago. Steam did the same. We are still in development phase and this is software. Mistakes happen and get solved. If Lightning Network finally works and gets adopted, I'll change my mind and FOMO in like an idiot with no regrets.
>I like Bitcoin, but Bitcoin is not working as intended, and I want to use my software called Bitcoin

[Anonymous No.7616631]

>>7616592
>>7616582


see, told you. lemme know when you have something to say against A YEARS WORTH OF RESEARCH BY MICROSOFT

[Anonymous No.7616641]

>>7616623
>15 posts by this ID
No, you won't.

[Anonymous No.7616652]

>>7614403
in the long runbitcoin will remain digital gold and digital currency will be a gen 2 gen 3 coin- not a shitcoin fork of bitcoin that uses pow. pos is the future. bcash shills are getting desperate, shilling their gen 1 shitcoin every fucking day.

[Anonymous No.7616661]

>>7616592
*centralization

[Anonymous No.7616669]

>>7614041
Burn in hell you fucking shitbag

[Anonymous No.7616677]

>>7616525
bcash willnever be a useful anything. it is a shitcoin fork of a shitcoin. gen - coins are obselete. no amount of polishing will make the bcash turd shine

[Anonymous No.7616687]

>>7616652
> remain digital gold
How is it better at being digital gold than any other shitcoin? Hell even XRP is #3. Do you really believe the market values BTC based on special magical property?

[Anonymous No.7616688]

>>7614041
this guys sell bitcoin cash a 300 usd.. think that a free money..

[Anonymous No.7616690]

>>7616382
I don't even hold btc but bch is the ultimate shitcoin. God damn.

[Anonymous No.7616696]

>>7616631
99% of the servers worldwide use Linux, why?

[Anonymous No.7616699]

>>7616677
*gen 1

[Anonymous No.7616722]

>>7616687
because people say it is. that is how gold works

[Anonymous No.7616745]

>>7616690
It's a despicable scam. They are trying to fool normalfags to buy bcash while they think that bcash is actually bitcoin.
No honest person would support this coin.

[Anonymous No.7616788]

>>7616745
I gotta give it to them, pretending to be an unbiased website teaching about the basics of bitcoin is pretty smart. Slimey as fuck, but smart.

[Anonymous No.7616810]

>>7616722
>God exists because people say it exists
It's better than gold because it's way safer, that gives it a lot of value. Also, it can be developped which makes "gold" turn into "diamonds".

[Anonymous No.7616814]

>>7616722
There are almost no other potential metals to use as currency, and you can't move to another metal without a great cost. Crypto on the other hand are easy to pump and dump and move around, so nothing by the same logic another coin will be #1 tomorrow. Also BTC has almost no uses, while gold has real uses.

[Anonymous No.7616815]

>>7616652
> fork of bitcoin that uses pow
the absolute state of coretard shills.

[Anonymous No.7616819]

lol. Bitcoin cash? Really? There are just so many better coins which don't need to pretent to be Bitcoin to find a few buyers.

BCH is just a shitcoin, exactly the same as Ethereum classic.

[Anonymous No.7616863]

>>7616819
Redpill us. We want to see the light. I'm losing money with BCH. Which coin is better?

[Anonymous No.7616880]

>>7616815
>knowing that their precious bitcoin fork is obselete gen 1 shit.
truth hurts you i see, that's why bcash shills are so dishonest.

[Anonymous No.7616903]

>>7616863
doge

[Anonymous No.7616907]

>>7616788
Is this a "you rage, you lost" thread? Because I just lose right now.

[Anonymous No.7616920]

>>7616810
strawman

[Anonymous No.7616950]

>>7616814
you're addressing an argument that i never made, another strawman.

[Anonymous No.7616952]

>>7614041
Examine your premises. You think "nobody likes this coin" because you hear baying idiots like the ones that have afflicted this thread piping in with character assassination, ignoring the underlying technical facts of the question, and all the various other things we're accustomed to as standard MO from core shills.
We know, for a fact, admitted by the CEO of blockstream, that they have a paid shill army to go out and spew this shit.
We know, for a fact, readily accessible by crunchbase and similar entities that track blockstream funding, that blockstream is effectively an arm of the axa / bildeberg / deep state paradigm.
Given that, they have effectively turned Bitcoin into another political arena, just like the one that they typically influence with their shit tier mainstream media for elections and associated nonsense, and what do they do in these elections? Do they focus on policy, do they discuss the actual likely impacts economically of any given change proposals? Or do they engage in character assassination and fearmonger about their least favourite plans, try to get as many idiotic proles out onto the street chanting slogans as possible, pay for subversive operations, etc etc etc?
Given we know who they are and how they act, what is at all surprising about the territory in which we find ourselves? You have one side talking about the actual technical underpinnings of the discussion and what they mean, and the other... well, fuck man, look around on this thread.

[Anonymous No.7616970]

>>7616952
Everything makes perfect sense. BTC is dead, the politicians hijacked and sabotaged it, but they couldn't kill the vision, and now that BTC is obviously dying to the extent transaction levels are back down to where they were two years ago, it's becoming very clear that BCH is still around and flourishing and chasing the original vision and looking at merchant adoption and the blockchain as a platform for genuine smart contracts, etc.
BCH is going to kill BTC. The prices now are a reflection of the fact that most of the market right now are stupid and don't realise this, and that's all.

[Anonymous No.7616980]

>>7616952
>this coin" because you hear baying idiots like the ones tha
nice arguments
>y the CEO of blockstream, that they have a paid shill a
nice arguments
>na, just like the one that they typic
nice arguments
>bout the territory in which we find ourselves? You have one
nice arguments
>>7616970
>erfect sense. BTC is dead, the politicians hijacked and sabotaged it, but they couldn't k
nice arguments
> to kill BTC. The prices now are a reflection of the fact that most of the market ri
nice arguments

[Anonymous No.7616989]

>>7616880
bcore lol

[Anonymous No.7616993]

>>7616920

[Anonymous No.7616994]

>>7614041
> SHILL THREAD
Abandon all roger

[Anonymous No.7617015]

>>7616980
bcore lol

[Anonymous No.7617029]

>>7616989
https://np.reddit.com/r/Buttcoin/comments/4936kw/lukejr_is_a_seriously_a_super_crazy_person_quotes/

[Anonymous No.7617032]

>>7617015
based

[Anonymous No.7617037]

digital gold is a dumb coping meme by people who realized their coin is useless for transactions now but cash isn't any better, bigger blocks is just a band-aid to hide the fact that it still only handles a tiny fraction of the number of transactions that real payment processors do every minute
if they upped the block size to those levels it would be completely centralized within a year

because they know they fail to address bitcoin's long term scalability issues they had to try and ride off bitcoin's fame by using the name
if you want long term viability you should look elsewhere entirely

[Anonymous No.7617047]

>>7616952
>>7616970
>>7616989
Thank you. My eyes are open again.

[Anonymous No.7617061]

Reminder people are not actually this stupid and they are just dishonest people, still for some reason trying to keep a deflating ponzi going.

[Anonymous No.7617066]

>>7617032
These fuckers need a taste of their own medicine every now and then.

[Anonymous No.7617075]

>BITCOIN FEES ARE AN ALL TIME LOW
> ROGER VER WILL STILL NOT GO!
by dr Suess

[Anonymous No.7617077]

>>7617037
>bitcoin is digital gold
>doesn't like that bitcoin is digital gold
>throws tantrum
sometimes reality bites hon

[Anonymous No.7617146]

>>7617077
just buy real gold, retard
the very idea of digital gold is nonsense and is not what anyone ever envisioned cryptocurrency to be
it's the admission that their technology is decrepit and the developers are taking far too long to address it with LN or another solution, and this has rendered it useless for a currency's singular purpose
and so long as it keeps losing 50% of its value multiple times a year, nobody is going to think of it as a good store of such

[Anonymous No.7617187]

>>7617077
I was ignoring you, but here's a reply just for you:
BCH holders like BTC. In fact, we love BTC. We couldn't have BCH without BTC. We'd like to see if BTC goes to $100k, that would drive BCH holders to a win-win situation. Why? You tell me.

[Anonymous No.7617308]

>>7614041
The only people who hate it are the male feminists who support bitcoin core. Men who have things going for them don't have the time for that, which is why you see less support for Bitcoin Cash. But it is there and there's lots of us who are accumulating.
Also this: https://bitinfocharts.com/bitcoin%20cash/address/19hZx234vNtLazfx5J2bxHsiWEmeYE8a7k

[Anonymous No.7617310]

>>7617029
He is indeed.

[Anonymous No.7617342]

>>7617075
Because if anyone even tries adopting BTC core, the fees will skyrocket again.
Why do virgin redditors think we're supposed to like their stupid ponzi when we can adopt an actual useful currency instead?

[Anonymous No.7617356]

>>7617037
> bigger blocks is just a band-aid to hide the fact that it still only handles a tiny fraction of the number of transactions that real payment processors do every minute
> if they upped the block size to those levels it would be completely centralized within a year
Not really. You could do sharding. That's what Ethereum chose as its main scaling solution. If bch had it today btc would have went to zero.

[Anonymous No.7617408]

>>7617308
Thanks for that chart!

[Anonymous No.7617425]

REMINDERS:
>BTC tx count today is lower than one (1) year ago.
>Blockstream lost so many devs, they literally removed the team page from their side

[Anonymous No.7617450]

>>7617356
And it *will* have it. What matters there is the philosophical position of the people involved, and on chain scaling is core policy for BCH, they'll do whatever it takes to make that happen, meaning hard forks necessary for sharding will be accepted and incorporated, etc.
There will be a point in time where there are so many transactions of such low potential value, that yeah, they're better off done in off chain layers, but that's perfectly alright, BCH has no problem with off chain scaling, they just don't want to be artificially constrained with regard to on chain capacity, as providing that is their core economic function.
What this also means is that any second layer projects will work better in BCH than they do in BTC, where they have blocked on chain scaling for absolutely no legitimate explicable or coherent reason whatsoever, except every now and then saying "oh it degrades decentralisation to do anything else". Any examination of this statement always boils down to it being complete horseshit, and it just so happens that while it's forcibly imposed it guts the entire project, and keeps the bildeberg / axa group very happy indeed. But I'm sure that's just a fucking coincidence, right, shill brigade? You still here listening?

[Anonymous No.7617476]

>>7617408
How about this chart, cunt?

[Anonymous No.7617513]

BTC has been killed by kike banks and I believe bch to be true to the original whitepaper. Those are the only reasons I need to feel confident in my investmet.

[Anonymous No.7617539]

>>7617476
That isn't a chart, but thanks for contributing to this thread. You actually know what you're talking about.

[Anonymous No.7617556]

>>7617539
Well it's not as impressive as this one I'll grant.

[Anonymous No.7617564]

>>7617513
only cashies believe this shit. gen 1 shitcoins are not going to make it. pow is obselete. bcash is obselete

[Anonymous No.7617571]

we are all part of history in the making here. Even if by some freak coincidence Core wins this, 2018 will be a year to remember and us neets are right in the middle of it

[Anonymous No.7617575]

>>7617539
Also, I'm a cunt, actually. I thought you were someone different than I actually intended. I apologise for calling you a cunt, that was uncalled for.

[Anonymous No.7617584]

>>7617425
nobody gives a fuck

[Anonymous No.7617594]

>>7617564
Well, that's an entirely different argument. Maybe you're right.

[Anonymous No.7617595]

>>7617556
some impressive ((decentralization)) you have there mate

[Anonymous No.7617607]

>>7617564
Right! this is the cunt I meant.

[Anonymous No.7617621]

>>7614105
>that quote
Bcash dropped

[Anonymous No.7617625]

Every BCH thread here is the same. It is a handful of poster ID's with 20-30+ posts of shilling

>1mb blocks were part of Satoshi's vision to prevent decentralization
>Deal with it

[Anonymous No.7617642]

>>7617584
>biggest coin thats everything is pegged to is utterly failing
>idgaf lel

[Anonymous No.7617664]

BCH threads here are always the same handful of ID's with 20-30+ posts just shilling

>1MB blocks were part of Satoshi's vision and prevents centralization of nodes
>Deal with it

[Anonymous No.7617681]

>>7617594
Not really. Nobodies patented anything and crypto is very modular.

[Anonymous No.7617684]

>>7617625
the absolute state of you cum chugging thundercunts

[Anonymous No.7617686]

>>7617664
>1MB blocks were part of Satoshi's vision and prevents centralization of nodes
Oh whew fucking lmao
I doubt you are capable of it but visit the github and read the comments he added to the code when the limit was first commited

[Anonymous No.7617694]

>>7617575
I don't care lol
>Higher IQ makes us immune to bullshit, and you know that *wink*

[Anonymous No.7617700]

>>7617450
Before bch will not have a congestion problem without first having a use in the first place. Tokenization could give it a boost, especially when eth is so congested.

>>7617556
That's not a real LN, they only have channels, but the users don't find paths. That's not even a simulation of a LN lel
>>7617625
so every other coin is not shilled, i got it

[Anonymous No.7617743]

>>7617686
Please post them.

[Anonymous No.7617756]

>>7617664
Maybe we like to think and argue actively? If I was wrong about something, I'd love to know, that is what makes me learn every day.

[Anonymous No.7617762]

>>7617700
The use case is currency, the original intent of the entire system, peer to peer electronic cash. But yes, tokenization and smart contracts are promising use cases also.
It looks pretty much exactly like the mainnet lightning map looks right now.
https:// lnmainnet.gaben.win/
This is not an accident
https:// medium.com/@jonaldfyookball/mathematical-proof-that-the-lightning-network-cannot-be-a-decentralized-bitcoin-scaling-solution-1b8147650800

[Anonymous No.7617819]

>>7617476
>Actual open source contributors
Who cannot propose protocol changes. Who cannot propose BIP-s. Who'd get fucked in one way or another (see Counterparty) if they disregard Blockstream financial interests.
Have you ever made a single pull request on github? Do you have the basic idea of how this works?

[Anonymous No.7617850]

>>7617743
His idea on how to handle it in future versions on btctalk

[Anonymous No.7617876]

>>7614041
I like this coin op. In fact it's one of my favorites. There's a lot of people who do. The problem is that there's a massive noob troll army that's bought into lies because it's all they get exposed to through the heavily censored Bitcoin media channels and they certainly don't understand the technicals enough to challenge what they're told. The "North Corea" comparison is extremely appropriate. Not to mention Adam Back had literally stated in Twitter they pay a whole team to censor and manipulate conversation s. Also all the old fags that actually know their shit and didn't jump ship for ETH or other big alts after so much of core's bullshit finally did for BCH.

[Anonymous No.7617889]

>>7617756
bigger block sizes only lead to limiting the number of nodes and centralizing consensus over time

Fundamentally BCH is not as decentralized as BTC. This is a fact

[Anonymous No.7617890]

>>7617819
In theory anyone can propose any changes in an actual open source project. You make the case precisely as to why this does not actually happen in BTC core, because it is *not* an actual open source project, it is masquerading as one, what it actually is is just an extension to Blockstream, and if your proposal conflicts with their interests, it will never get in, period.
I have been a software developer for 22 years, I am well acquainted with how git works, and many revision control systems before it.

[Anonymous No.7617912]

>>7617850
I think you didn't catch >>7617664 's sarcasm.

[Anonymous No.7617914]

>>7617889
All relevant LN nodes will be run by literal banks, the very things BTC was built to cut out.

[Anonymous No.7617962]

>>7614041
It's a technological dead end made by morons who think wishful thinking and marketing is how you make a good long-term working crypto. (It's actually how you make a medium term scam)

[Anonymous No.7617985]

>>7617889
No, it's a lie. Non mining nodes don't actually do anything useful.
If you conceptualise the entire system as a single computer, mining nodes are the actual central processing unit, while non mining nodes are just cables that transfer IO from and to it.
BTC and BCH use exactly the same set of miners, therefore are exactly as decentralised as each other if this is as far as the analysis examines. Of course, since BTC has been basically sabotaged and turned into a completely broken product until the arrival of lightning, and since we can clearly demonstrate with empirical maps of the mainnet lightning network that it matches a centralised hub and spoke topology, BTC Is far less decentralised than BCH, and we also have mathematical proofs as to why this routing topology will remain a permanent fixture of the system.
If we had a fucking brain at all and looked at the interests of the parties involved, we might even realise that it was intentional, and banks can neatly drop in their operating entities in the space in centralised LN hubs, and act as gatekeepers in BTC exactly as they act as gatekeepers in the traditional financial system.
Luckily that is not a problem for you. If you're a shill, it means you have job security, if you're a useful idiot, you'll never grasp it.

[Anonymous No.7618012]

>>7617889
It is not. Academic research disproved this quite awhile ago. Funny enough, BTC is actually more centralized for a number of reasons. One example is because fees got to be so high small miners were having to pay too much or wait too long to get their funds out of the pools, which forced many of them into BCH or other coins. These posts were all over the place on various social channels before the recent crash.

Next and most importantly. BTC has a "reference client" and that is controlled by 1 company. Personally, I'd say you'd have to be ignorant or insane to trust your money is safe when it's effectively controlled by 1 company like that.

[Anonymous No.7618018]

>>7617985
>Non mining nodes don't actually do anything useful.
I guess not having to trust any third party is not a "useful" feature.

[Anonymous No.7618058]

>>7617889
Adoption is not instant. 180GB blockchain needs to grow slow and steady if we want to see a 2TB blockchain. With 1MB blocks, the blockchain is simply not going to grow.
>It's my opinion, I may be wrong

[Anonymous No.7618061]

>>7617890
Maybe I shouldn't have quoted you but someone else, anyways, 100% agreed.
"Open source" in blockstream's case means "we make the rules, but if you wanna do our work for free - go for it"
Hardly "open"

[Anonymous No.7618063]

>>7618018
It would be if it actually were the case, but it's not. You can run a BCH node just fine, even on a shitty old raspberry pi 3 model b, I do it myself. So even if you *do* have this whole "AAAAH SPV WALLETS ARE DEMONIC SAVE ME" bullshit going on in your head because of that hillbilly hick's propaganda, it *still* doesn't actually validate the position.

[Anonymous No.7618080]

>>7617985
>broken product
BTC transactions seem to be working for me. Go to bed Roger

[Anonymous No.7618087]

>>7618018
useful to the one running it who can now verify tx himself, but not useful to the network

[Anonymous No.7618104]

>>7618061
Bingo.
It's absolutely unsurprising these people sought to enact control at the development layer, they're familiar with that mode of operation from their other ventures; buy out the legislature and have them enact your policy from the top down.
It doesn't work in a blockchain, and they don't understand that, which is why they're just throwing more shills at the problem and hoping it will go away. They're bleeding to death and they know it.

[Anonymous No.7618118]

>>7618058
You are proving my point. As the network grows and more big blocks add up, only data centers owned by the big players will be able to run nodes and will then be in control of consensus.

[Anonymous No.7618121]

>>7618063
>You can run a BCH node just fine
If it ever takes off like BTC, you can't.

[Anonymous No.7618136]

Bcash is the real Bitcoin. Bcore is the bastard shitcoin.

[Anonymous No.7618137]

>>7618080
Right, because transactions have fallen to the level of March 2016. It works now like it works then because everyone abandoned it and only shills and idiots remain. Congratulations, which are you?

[Anonymous No.7618150]

>>7618080
because your shitty coin is losing all of its usage

[Anonymous No.7618189]

>>7618121
That too would be incorrect, if it only ever gets to the same state as BTC, you'll still be fine, because it would be doing the exact same thing.
At *some* point in time, you may reach a level where you can't adequately process the entire network throughput on your raspberry pi 3 model b.
There are more powerful computers than this though, so also not an issue. In fact if you were to describe the hardware necessary to handle throughput of x in terms of transaction fees required at artificial limit y, you would probably find a relationship that highlights the idiocy of attempting to manage the problem by imposing artificial limit y.
But.. central planners eh, can't teach them fucking economics no matter what, it's hilarious it's fucking *china* teaching you people this.

[Anonymous No.7618196]

>>7618118
you dont need to be a datacenter to have an array of a couple petabyte.
Sure you cant be a total noob with a raspberry but It will take years for current yea server hardware to be required, and by then regular hardware may even be enough.

[Anonymous No.7618229]

>>7618058
Hmm, no, not really. Read about Moore's and Kryder's law.
>2018
>Not having at least a 2TB HDD for storage

[Anonymous No.7618248]

>>7614041
It's literally a copy of bitcoin but with key upgrades stripped as to allow bitmain to keep it's mining advantage with asic boost.

You can't scale through block size. The only people advocating for it are brainlets such as yourself and salesmen like Roger. BCH is a hack job.

[Anonymous No.7618257]

>>7618118
Hmm, no, not really. Read about Moore's and Kryder's law.
>2018
>Not having at least a 2TB HDD for storage

[Anonymous No.7618268]

>>7618189
That some point of time will come much sooner than you think. BTC chain is already big, even when they have been very conservative on the block size. BCH chain would be huge, in addition to network bandwidth bottlenecks.

Just look at Ethereum and their more liberal blocksize policy.

[Anonymous No.7618295]

>>7618248
Except the evidence is showing that bitcoin can easily scale through blocksize up to visa levels with 8 year old hardware.

[Anonymous No.7618330]

>>7618268
> That some point of time will come much sooner than you think.
My good core shill, it cannot come fast enough, I wish it came months ago, I can only hope you're right.
> Just look at Ethereum and their more liberal blocksize policy.
Right, what am I supposed to be observing? it works? Fantastic illustration there. It's almost as if there were some kind of gap between permanently limiting the on chain throughput to 14kbps, and permanently processing all transactions for the entirety of all intelligent life in the galaxy going forward the next million years on chain with a raspberry pi, but it couldn't be so simple, all this fuss over such an idiotic obfuscation?

[Anonymous No.7618342]

>>7618295
The delusion here is off the charts.

[OmegaMaker No.7618364]

>>7618248
Everything you just typed out is complete bullshit and you know it. If BCH is a hackjob then BTC has always been a hackjob. Segwit isn't an upgrade, its worthless coding bloat that accomplished nothing. Block size is clearly the most straight-forward, simple, and efficient way of scaling IN ALL REGARDS.

[Anonymous No.7618374]

>>7618330
The problem here is that you can't accurately predict the future based on technology. It's your money. Do what you will. Unless you are just lying and trying to scam people, in which case you can go fuck yourself.

[Anonymous No.7618390]

>>7618342
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SJm2ep3X_M

[Anonymous No.7618395]

>>7618295
Not only can it scale perfectly well with blocksize increases and remain decentralized, but BCH fully supports 2nd layer solutions. If lightning network is a success it will be on BCH and it will work better. (And you don't have to have Segwit to have lightning)

[Anonymous No.7618435]

>>7614105
He's right though. Government shouldn't have a role in marriage. It is government that has literally undermined marriage. Prove me wrong.

[Anonymous No.7618446]

These threads are great. State facts about the shortcomings of big block sizes and you get called a shill for BTC...the cognitive bias is strong

>"multiple petabyte array" or buying a separate server size HDD
vs.
>raspberry pi for $30

[Anonymous No.7618447]

>>7618080
Be quiet! Nobody should know the upsides of batching or segwit! Or that the mempool is much cleaner! Stop insulting me!

[Anonymous No.7618449]

>>7618374
You can observe trends, and you can make extrapolations from those trends, or you can impose an artificial limit millions of miles below even present limits and try to explain it away as a hard technical limit which the limits of technology impose, but only complete fuckwits will actually listen to you.
And, here we are, and I'm talking to a complete fuckwit who listened to them *sigh*.

[Anonymous No.7618458]

>>7618395
Im looking forward to JUSTed bankrupt core shills sperging about BCH "stealing" the payment channrel idea

[Anonymous No.7618459]

>>7618395
If BCH ever adds LN and Segwit, all you will have is a shittier version of BTC with a bigger blockchain.

[Anonymous No.7618474]

>>7618459
>(And you don't have to have Segwit to have lightning)

[Anonymous No.7618486]

>>7618474
Just makes it much easier.

[Anonymous No.7618493]

>>7618395
>LN is a centralized bank scam!!!
>BCH will have LN too and it will work better lolz

I swear....

[Anonymous No.7618503]

>>7618459
Im looking forward to opening and closing channels for less than a cent desu

[Anonymous No.7618510]

I hope you idiots take your money from bch and toss it in btg.

Btg is the coin the old holders have bought.
Bch is riddled with scams and insider work going on to make those involved richer.

[Anonymous No.7618518]

>>7614041
Obnoxious fanbase

[Anonymous No.7618521]

>>7618493
Channels on BCH will be between trusted parties, not a non-routable mess

>>7618510
whew

[Anonymous No.7618530]

>>7618446
Raspberry pi's can't run nodes. You don't run nodes, the users don't run nodes. BTC's transaction cost was higher than the price to run a node.

[Anonymous No.7618579]

>>7617876
Bch isn't popular because it has little pump and dump potentital. Other coins like XRP and XRB are popular not because they're good for anything but because every news about bank partnership pumps the XRP price 20% even when there's no evidence the xrp wil ever be used, and every time XRB tweets and update the price spikes 10%. You can't do that in a coin which its feature is to make more tps.

[Anonymous No.7618590]

>>7614677
>reinstate the op-codes

[Anonymous No.7618628]

>>7614703
Microsoft also dropped BTC for XRP. Really made me think.

[Anonymous No.7618666]

>>7618104
>BTC is not a loose mesh but in fact a nearly complete graph of nearly all-to-all connections within the validation network (meaning the mining network), the belief that it is a loose mesh makes people very afraid of scaling.
>This is the same with every other coin I know of (edit: besides of course BCH). They always either believe they need a bunch of no-skin-in-the-game "nodes" for decentralization, or that at least these so-called "nodes" need to be cheap to run.
>Neither are true for any mined coin, so any mined coin can scale to millions of TPS with no loss of decentralization if it understands that and if its design embraces the all-to-all network topology as a mining network with no need for these so-called "nodes" that Satoshi never prescribed. >Except for merchants and payment processors dealing with 0-conf, but never for decentralization purposes - it's crucial to understand that this idea that non-mining clients can do anything to help decentralization arose SOLELY out of a misunderstanding of how SPV works and a misunderstanding that Bitcoin is a mesh network (though the two misunderstandings feed each other).

[Anonymous No.7618696]

>>7618666

[Anonymous No.7618718]

>>7614976
>spamming the network
No such thing.

[Anonymous No.7618750]

>>7618510
> btg
BTG could be killed instantly. The only correct way to do truly incentivized mining is with dedicatd hw which isn't used primarily for one coin.

[Anonymous No.7618785]

>>7615643
Can you even buy crypto there?

[Anonymous No.7618849]

Make it plan and simple if your not supporting Bcash your not supporting the future of Crypto in this world

[Anonymous No.7618850]

>>7615655
>back in August for ~$300 a pop I'd jump on /biz/ and there was hardly any discussion about BCH

I didn't get red pilled about BCH until later on. Fees made me investigate as I think it did for a lot of other people. Glad I held my forked coins and wasn't retarded.

[Anonymous No.7619052]

>>7616952
It's literally the same "Trumps a racist" shit we dealt with during the election.

[Anonymous No.7619108]

bumping corecuck-rekt bread

[Anonymous No.7619135]

>>7614334
Someone upset babby. Shouldn't you be feasting on tendies and having mommy change your diaper?

[Anonymous No.7619170]

>>7618850
They happened daily and it usually went like this.
>BCC is garbage
>BCC is a scam
>nobody will pay you anything for these
Then you had one or two posters come in and just drop knowledge bombs on these retards. Half a year later it's the exact same shit.

[Anonymous No.7619280]

>>7619052
Right, and I don't believe this to be an accident. This is how they operate. And it works, in the vast majority of cases people fall for it, this is the big test, to see if it works here. If BCH fails, they've proven empirically the concept of blockchains as a hedge against political authority is unworkable.
I don't believe that to be case, though I will admit I am concerned at how damned close they came. I am hoping that we're all vaccinated to this shit now and any similar attempt in future will be spotted from a hundred miles, but my experience with human idiocy leaves me worried, it appears to be an inexhaustible fount.

[Anonymous No.7619319]

>>7614041
How is BCH better than LTC? It's actually worse because LTC has shorter block times.
Both have no future.
The real battle is between BTC and ETH. We all know the inevitable result.

[Anonymous No.7619348]

>>7618248
>mining technology shouldn't be allowed to improve
>PoW should remain inefficient

Wew, why do you faggots hate free markets?

[Anonymous No.7619364]

>>7618850
Remember this stuff is valued based on news and I expect a massive pump after the next hard fork, so keep hodling...

[Anonymous No.7619400]

>>7619319
BCH is gonna have subchains, which is better than short block times.

[Anonymous No.7619408]

>>7619319
LTC shares the exact same philosophy as BTC, meaning the exact same problems which afflict BTC would afflict LTC if LTC were actually ever to accrue any kind of traction.
Knowing that, why the fuck would anyone actually build on LTC and give it any kind of traction?
And thus, here we have LTC with no traction and the founder having sold off all his coins.
Shorter block times aren't necessarily better, they come with their own costs, most obviously increased orphan rates.

[Anonymous No.7619460]

>this triggers the redditor

[Anonymous No.7619562]

>>7615754
This is more of an argument against blockstream than BCH

[Anonymous No.7619568]

>>7619280
>vaccinated to this shit
Yeah I'm trying to see the positives of this. We all thought we were untouchable and didn't remain vigilant on crypto. Blockstream showed us that bad actors can in fact hijack the network. The fight for freedom must never stop.

[Anonymous No.7619601]

>>7619400
Subchains are a meme. They are absurd once you understand mining. There's literally zero incentive for other miners to include 'weak' blocks.

It's the same nonsense as pushing 0-conf as solution for everything. 0-conf works for some products (either very cheap, or physical, or those that can be reverted) but doesn't work for most. In particular it doesn't work for exchanges AT ALL.

>>7619408
>they come with their own costs, most obviously increased orphan rates.

Only in BTC there's a real risk of waiting hour+ for a block.That's horrible and I hate doing any transfers with BTC. With ETH I just pay using current fee from ethgasstation and it gets confirmed in 5 minutes AT MOST. Shorter block times decrease the probability of no blocks during x minutes exponentially.

I would happily pay more for eth transfers than for btc because of that. Time is money. Of course, the highest eth's fee for a simple eth transfer got was about $1 vs $30 for btc.

[Anonymous No.7619700]

>>7619601
I use ETC for financial backhaul between exchanges on arbitrage for just that reason desu. It's a fairly uncrowded chain, but has super low block times, and not much price action so you don't get much exposure there either. Kind of beside the point but yeah.
Back on track though, when the block reward is 300k USD, you *really* don't want to lose it, under any circumstances at all, so orphans in BTC have historically been a big deal.

[Anonymous No.7620566]

>>7614041
Please explain why I would use bcash when dogecoin largely accomplishes the same thing.

[Anonymous No.7620657]

>>7616952
>>7616952
>stop with the character assassination
>if you disagree with bcash you are a paid shill though!!!!!!!
The lack of self-awareness from cashcunts is astounding

[Anonymous No.7620711]

>>7617310
nice character asssassination, some real technical discussion in your count

Remind me why I would use BCH when Litecoin and Dogecoin exist.

[Anonymous No.7620731]

>>7620657
> start a fight
> get hit back
> "waaah you're so violent"
Take big step back and literally fuck your own face.

[Anonymous No.7620747]

>>7620731
Nice technical discussion.

Why should I use BCH over Dogecoin or Litecoin? You literally cannot answer this.

[Anonymous No.7620750]

>>7620711
Because it's actually Bitcoin, rather than the cheap shitty knockoff sabotaged hijack version your kike overlords have sent you here to shill for, cuntface.

[Anonymous No.7620778]

>>7616989
>False equivalence

[Anonymous No.7620805]

>>7616788
what more than this right here does anyone need to see that this is a huge fraud (at best)?

[Anonymous No.7620817]

>>7620778
>clueless idiocy

[Anonymous No.7620823]

>>7620750
>Because it's actually Bitcoin
It's not though. It's called Bitcoin Cash, not Bitcoin.

[Anonymous No.7620852]

>>7620711
Use Dogecoin if you like. I'd advise against Litecoin because it has Segwit.

[Anonymous No.7620879]

>>7620823
The name is not as relevant as the object which it describes, Bitcoin Cash is peer to peer electronic cash, what shills like yourself wish we'd refer to as Bitcoin is not that at all, it's some kiked up settlement layer with a non functional routing network plastered on top, that may well never actually work at all, but if it does, will only reinstate the existing order of the mainstream financial system onto the territory it will be usurping.

[Anonymous No.7620916]

>>7616952
>>7617015
>>7616989
>>7617310
>>7617607
>complain about character assassination
>do the exact same thing
Some strong arguments there.

[Anonymous No.7620918]

>>7620750
This.

[Anonymous No.7620953]

>>7620916
Retaliation is not aggression. If core shills start "elevating the discourse" I will restrain from calling attention to their toothless hillbilly hicks, bumbling neckbeard fuckwits, and clueless blathering tabs advocates.
Until then, deal with it cunt.

[Anonymous No.7621006]

>>7620747

There is no reason, just use the coin that works best for your use case. BTC/BCH shills won't like to hear this, but the faster those two dinosaur coins vanish the better. The shit fight between BTC/BHC did split a big part of the crypto community (which will probably cost us several years to recover from) and we lost our initial goal out of sight: Get rid of the fucking banks ...

[Anonymous No.7621017]

>>7620953
>y-you started it!
Literally not an argument. Don't throw stones in a glass house.

[Anonymous No.7621060]

>>7621006
I wouldn't count on it. We're on the cusp of new religion and politics. These disputes will never go away entirely.

[Anonymous No.7621084]

>>7621017
"not an argument" is not an argument, when it is said in response to an argument.
I'm not going to just sit around and tolerate it from the other side without getting my own punches in, I'm not some passive whining soyboy who just wishes everybody would get along, you come at me and act like a cunt, I'll be a cunt right back.

[Anonymous No.7621183]

>>7621084
"Not is an argument" is not an argument, but a useful phrase for dismissal of non-arguments, which is what you posted.

>I'm not going to just sit around and tolerate it from the other side without getting my own punches in, I'm not some passive whining soyboy who just wishes everybody would get along, you come at me and act like a cunt, I'll be a cunt right back.
This also isn't an argument, this is just a hysterical emotional rant from an internet tough guy.

[Anonymous No.7621207]

>>7621183
The argument is that aggression and retaliation are not the same thing and your treating them the same way is the problem with your statement. You're effectively saying "is not", which, although unsurprising given the level of intelligence you've displayed so far, is itself not actually an argument, kys shill.

[Anonymous No.7621244]

Muahahahaah core devs getting super frustrated
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/7xar4q/bitcoin_core_devs_discussing_possibility_to/

[Anonymous No.7621252]

>>7621207
You are defending your non-arguments with tu quoque fallacy.

Also, you seem like kind of a faggot

>i-i'm not some passive s-soyboy, i'm REAL TOUGH GUY AND I WILL THROW PUNCHES BACK OVER AN ANONYMOUS IMAGEBOARD!!!11
what a fag, i bet you were bullied in school.

[Anonymous No.7621296]

>>7621244
T-this i-is our open source p-project!

[Anonymous No.7621337]

>>7621060
Yeah, I have no hope that this shit will resolve in the next decade.
But it's sad, why are people so stupid ... instead of fighting over this shit we should concentrate our power/focus and work towards the initial big goal.
But no, better fight the other team(s). It's always the same misdirected red vs blue shit fight.

[Anonymous No.7621347]

>>7621252
You are using fancy language to cover up the fact that you are indeed just saying "is not".
And you just seem like some clueless garden variety shill with a random insult generator labouring under the mistaken impression I give a nanofuck what you think.

[Anonymous No.7621364]

>>7621347
Feel free to start presenting actual arguments then.

[Anonymous No.7621379]

>fuck bcash because their big blocks centralize the network
>better use the centralized Lightning™ Network™ by the private company LightningLabs® and its patented™ technologies
go fuck yourselves core shills.

[Anonymous No.7621387]

>>7621244
>some random dick posts a suggestion
hurrrrrrrrr lookit muh core devs want this thing some random dick posted hurrrrrrrrr

[Anonymous No.7621414]

>>7621006
how can you seriously think that you can get rid of banks simply by creating e-tokens? they have been building their capital for literal centuries. they study human behavior, practice social engineering and use money as mere tool to power. they thrive in greed. they thrive in war. they thrive in crisis. they subverted entire nations and their legislatures. any real threat/competition will be wiped one way or another. it's just the logical thing to do.

[Anonymous No.7621454]

I like apples

[Anonymous No.7621567]

>>7621364
This guy pretty much summed up the entire situation, from start to finish, of how Blockstream hijacked and sabotaged Bitcoin, with descriptions of the lightning topology to back it up both in proof and reality, as well as calling out the funding and parties behind Blockstream, and your comeback is "waaah why the character assassination, where are your actual arguments, you said fuck! I'm going to tell momma".
I don't think I've ever seen someone so flagrantly jewish. You should get some kind of medal in kikery.

[Anonymous No.7621590]

>>7621567
I'm sorry anon but that isn't an argument. Care to try again?

[Anonymous No.7621629]

>>7621337
Because each side sees the other as the antithesis of what bitcoin is suppose to be and a threat to true financial freedom. At least that's how I see it as a Cash supporter. This ideological dichotomy is common throughout history.

[Anonymous No.7621653]

>>7621414
Defeatist cuck.

[Anonymous No.7621743]

>>7621590
Now I'm starting to think you're actually trolling and trying to make the core faction look bad.

[Anonymous No.7621791]

https://cloudblogs.microsoft.com/enterprisemobility/2018/02/12/decentralized-digital-identities-and-blockchain-the-future-as-we-see-it/
>While some blockchain communities have increased on-chain transaction capacity (e.g. blocksize increases), this approach generally degrades the decentralized state of the network and cannot reach the millions of transactions per second the system would generate at world-scale.
kek

[Anonymous No.7621828]

>>7621791
>>7618330
False dichotomy on the scaling target, unproven assertion on the decentralisation degradation.

[Anonymous No.7621831]

>>7621743
You haven't presented a single cohesive argument in this thread, just incoherent babbling about kikes and corecucks and such.

[Anonymous No.7621857]

>>7621831
Ah! That is what you're doing, I see, very clever, carry on.

[Anonymous No.7621870]

>>7614041
It’s useless. Litecoin has been doing the same thing (fast, low fees) for years and is much more widely used

[Anonymous No.7621910]

>>7621653
care to elaborate how stating the obvious to anyone with triple digit IQ and enough information on subject is being 'defeatist cuck' ?
no offence but you sound like 16yo wannabe shit revolting against the system/capitalism while sitting at starbucks on your apple airbook wearing converse sneakers thinking how edgy you are.

please present any and all arguments why do you think e-coins are a valid threat to bankers, why do you think they will succeed and how exactly are cryptos safe to manipulation/subversion if the opponent has unlimited resources and the wallets are anonymous, thank you

[Anonymous No.7621940]

>>7621414
These e-tokens are just the tip of the iceberg of the start of the total decentralization. I'm sure that more and more stuff will get decentralized over the years, because proper decentralization is almost indestructible. Decentralization will be used to create self serving nationless, borderless, permission less entities. And once a certain threshold is reached, banks won't be needed anymore. Also there is no way to stop this process, because the network effect will force more and more stuff to be decentralized and everything that keeps beeing centralized for power reasons (exchanges, dev-teams, ...) will vanish at one point.

[Anonymous No.7622123]

>>7614437
I'm not shilling nano. I'm saying the only reason people support Bitcoin cash is
>it has Bitcoin in the name
>they used the same logo but turned the other way to confuse people into thinking it's btc
>ver going around saying it's the true btc and will replace it's name eventually
they are set on being the next BTC rather than the next leading cryptocurrency. it's fucking retarded.

[Anonymous No.7622144]

>>7621910
>revolting against the system/capitalism
No, crypto is unabashedly capitalistic. Its capitalism that we're attempting to restore. If you think central banking is capitalism, then you're already off on the wrong foot.

At any rate, crypto is unique in its ability to communicate value peer to peer globally without permission. It will succeed where gold failed. Gold is heavy, not digitized in a global economy and easily seized. Transactions are immutable and counterfeiting is impossible. However that doesn't make crypto immune to attacks by the powers that be. See any Cash argument ever about Blockstream, their backers and intended purposes.

[Anonymous No.7622245]

>>7621629
Yeah, but isn't this antithesis in reality just a minor technical issue? Both sides believe that their solution is the superior one, and one will be right in the end. But couldn't we just see this as an simple A/B test and then move on once the winner is clear?
I also believe that however, from those two groups can get most of the other crypto community behind it's back will win no matter if their solution is the superior one, but that another thing ...

[Anonymous No.7622247]

>>7622123
They're not set on being the next BTC or the next cryptocurrency, they're set on being the original Bitcoin, with the vision that came with it, and the architecture to deliver it. That was the plan from the beginning and it is still the plan now and nothing has changed except Blockstream hijacking the vehicle that used to drive things before they took over and put it back on the original trail pic related.

[Anonymous No.7622499]

>>7621870
LTC was virtually a copy pasted of the BTC code, it didn't invent anything. The only reason it was created was to let the founder amass all the cheap cheap early coins. BCH on the other hand is a fork of BTC, so everyone who held BTC received the same amount of BCH.

[Anonymous No.7622517]

>>7621940
>nationless,borderless
literally globalists wet dreams.
be realist - racial and cultural differences is why it's not going to happen. at least not voluntarily.

>>7622144
>it's capitalism we're trying to restore
how exactly is it going to happen? there are 1500+ coins, all of them used for speculative gains.. everyone looks just at the $ value. you don't buy shit with BTC.. so what value? 19k one day, 7k month later? BTC is defeating itself.

[Anonymous No.7622645]

>>7622245
A minor technical issue has enormous economic implications. In the case of Segwit, blocks are small and transacting on the blockchain is cost and lead time prohibitive. Their solution is to just not use the blockchain at all and use 3rd party Lightning nodes instead. Subject to KYC and required to have massive liquidity to keep their central hub open, literally a bank. Cash's solution is to raise blocksize keeping transactions peer to peer and continue utilizing the blockchain for end users. In Segwit's model there really isn't any reason to use crypto at all.

>>7622517
You're being purposely shortsighted. The liquidity of all crypto is tiny. These massive swings in price action won't be possible once crypto reaches larger market capitalization. Competing coins is literal capitalism, you defeated your own argument.

>you don't buy shit with BTC
You're right, I buy shit with BCH.

[Anonymous No.7622831]

>>7618295
No and no.

And if you guys were right that would mean BCH is strongly undervalued and you should be quietly scooping it up for cheap, instead of diligently defending it's honour on 4chan every day. So you're either wrong, retarded or paid shills.

Anyway if anyone could hook me up with a BCH shilling gig it would be great [e-mail]

[Anonymous No.7622844]

>>7622645
good luck with adopting volatile shit you are obliged to tax that burned normies that seek securities and assurances as a new currency..
wake up, you're dreaming

[Anonymous No.7622907]

>>7622517
Yeah, but the ongoing globalization through the internet will leave us no other option then to adapt. And yes, the racial and cultural differences will determine which nation/region will adapt the fastest. But in the end cultures will change or become extinct.

[Anonymous No.7622941]

>>7622831
The speculative gains are nice, but adoption is important as is redpilling people about Blockstream and Segwit. By all means go with whichever coin you think is best with all the information presented to you.

>>7622844
k

[Anonymous No.7622942]

>>7622831
>if you guys were right that would mean BCH is strongly undervalued

That's not how it works. Scaling is irrelevant unless existing limits are hit. It's not that scaling is a direct advantage, it's that _lack_ of scaling kills because it strangles growth. That growth has to be there for other reasons.

In ethereum's case that ICOs are that reason, it bootstrapped adoption in other areas. BCH has nothing.

[Anonymous No.7622952]

>>7622645
LN tx's use onion style routing you fuck, KYC would be pointless and impossible.

[Anonymous No.7622977]

>>7616952
AMEN

BCH

[Anonymous No.7622991]

>>7622952
Onion routing is optional. Also due to the way it works every hop knows its previous and next hop. So for routes shorter than 4 there's no privacy even with onion routing.

[Anonymous No.7623003]

>>7622952
Nodes subject to KYC will not accept Onion routed payments, that would defeat the entire point of KYC. Your only work around for this is to route through someone else and then to the central hub. Said person will never accept this risk and if said person did, they'd go to jail for KYC fraud. Or if they're outside of the legal reach, they'll just be censored.

[Anonymous No.7623011]

Because Roger Ver is gross person. He's as cringey as any Randroid can get.

Also, Core will inevitably increase blocksizes at some point which will make bcash pointless.

[Anonymous No.7623036]

>>7622907
i'm sorry, in my nations vocabulary adapt equals to 'protect own borders', not 'invite every starving passerby african'

[Anonymous No.7623124]

Bcash retards in full crisis mode

>DEBATE US NOW

lol you faggots will never be bitcoin, sorry you bought in late

[Anonymous No.7623129]

>>7622991
>>7623003
Prove it.
https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lightning-onion

[Anonymous No.7623169]

>>7623129
I already did. It appears you don't understand the legal framework of KYC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Know_your_customer

[Anonymous No.7623201]

>>7623169
No, prove how LN nodes could even remotely attempt to implement that...

[Anonymous No.7623207]

>>7622645
Yeah, I know it's more complicated then that. But in the end it's just a technical problem, and people keep mixing this up with their theological believes of how things should work. It doesn't matter if it's stupid, if it's working in the end ...
That said, I'm also leaning in favor for BCH even though I don't like roger and his gang. But just because raising the blocksize seems to be a simpler and more elegant solution than to build upon something that has scaling issues and hope you can solve these scaling issues thereby ...
And there was also the thing that Adam wanted to drop usb sticks from cargo planes over Africa, preloaded with the blockchain that made me question his sanity ... (when blockstream "launched" the satellite)

[Anonymous No.7623277]

>>7623129
nion routing is optional because every hub can just demand you tell them your entire route as a condition of using them
Why did you even link to github like that's relevant.

[Anonymous No.7623309]

>>7623124
Omg that's so dumb. Bch is NOT a new coin, it's a fork. If you had 1 btc before the fork, you have 1 btc and 1 bch after the fork happened, so 1. everyone who owned btc before thet fork profits from bch just as much as someone who bought it after the fork, 2. the only people receiving the coins were people who already BOUGHT btc

[Anonymous No.7623315]

>>7614041
why use bcash when you can use nano

[Anonymous No.7623328]

>>7621567
>Slowly I began hating BCore

[Anonymous No.7623366]

>>7621910
We justr want to get rich anon. Its easier getting rich with a coin that scales. Its just gotta scale for 5 more years for us to make 100X returns.

[Anonymous No.7623374]

>>7623201
LN nodes aren't making the decision to, they are subject to these laws as public payment processors.

[Anonymous No.7623390]

>>7622831
>implying Im not accumulating whenever I can

[Anonymous No.7623438]

I view BTC supporters in the same light as unwealthy republicans - they're ignorantly supporting a hidden 1% agenda. Just follow the money to the ideas and you'll see the light.

[Anonymous No.7623491]

>>7623036
I didn't mean that this will lead to you having to give up your territorial rights or mix up races and cultures.
These decentral entities, will just work across all human created borders.
I even think that it will lead to people getting back to their cultural roots, because it will probably play an even bigger role in their identification process with the ever changing hyperconnected world.

[Anonymous No.7623498]

>>7614041
Lightning network doesn't work. Even in theory litecoin is superior.

[Anonymous No.7623512]

>>7623003
BlockStream is alreardy working on KYC:
>Ben Gorlick (Previously Director & Head of Product at Blockstream) is now working with a company that is developing KYC/AML infrastructure and framework for regulatory compliance: http://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/Shyft-Introduces-Revolutionary-Blockchain-Based-KYC-AML-Network-For-Global-Economy-1015123156

[Anonymous No.7623526]

>>7623498
You'll be glad to hear litecoin is planning to scale via LN then..........

[Anonymous No.7623537]

>>7623277
I linked it so you can read about it from the devs themselves, and not whatever retarded construction you have in your mind.

>>7623374
>>7623277
Prove it.
Don't make claims, prove it.

[Anonymous No.7623558]

>>7623512
Do you think corecucks will still pretend LN is great if it actually succeeds and becomes the banker-run IOU-network?
I mean seriously thats got to hurt. You realize it was (them) all along and have to live with knowing you shilled it everywhere.

[Anonymous No.7623563]

>>7623537
forgot pic with highlight

[Anonymous No.7623580]

>>7614041
it's so good for making money i love it

[Anonymous No.7623671]

>>7623526
It's a lot worse than that, the LN will be cross-coin, so LTC and BTC will reach 1:4 ratio long term. BTC hodlers are plain dumb for not seeing this.

[Anonymous No.7623696]

>>7623558
They only want to sell it later to the next sucker after they made 1000%, they don't give a shit if it's a scam.

[Anonymous No.7623742]

>>7623537
>>7623563
Because they will be operating as money transmitters under the current KYC legal framework, that you keep failing to understand. Operating a liquidity pool to transmit money is no different then what banks or services like Money Gram do now, which are subject to KYC.

Onion routing doesn't make a difference in this as I've already pointed out to you here >>7623003

[Anonymous No.7623805]

>>7623558
For the shills, job security.
For the useful idiots, most don't even notice, because they're idiots, others will notice and rationalise their actions as having had no choice, and the rest will be incensed and become the most fanatical opposition you can imagine.
That's why the soviets intended to execute their useful idiots en masse. Safest option.

[Anonymous No.7623814]

>>7623558
I doubt it'll ever become stable. Even if it does, all central hubs are subject to DDOS because they're IP has to be known to route. Channel closes and all participants lose their fucking money.

https://lnmainnet.gaben.win/

Just click on a central hub and look in the bottom left corner in the URI field. You can see the IP and port, clear as fucking day. People think this totally okay.

[Anonymous No.7623888]

>>7623814
It can also be sybilled.

[Anonymous No.7623912]

I don't hold BCH or BTC for that matter but could someone explain to me the following without using the words "shill" or "jew" or "shitcoin"...


Aside from being the most valuable coin at the moment how is BTC superior to BCH, Litecoin, ETH, etc?


As an outsider it's always come off to me as this.

>Lots of people already own BTC
>Crypto technology improves
>BTC holders try to shit on every coin despite having unusable scaling.
>BTC holders don't want their technologically inferior coin devalued
>All crypto suffers

[Anonymous No.7623932]

>>7623814
I guess those hubs would be major banks and corporations with state of the art DDOS protection.
Which makes the "everyone can create a node" meme even funnier

[Anonymous No.7623948]

>>7623888
check'd

Yeah I almost forgot, and the risk of such an attack compounds as the network grows.

>>7623932
kek

[Anonymous No.7624015]

>>7623912
First mover advantage
It gets a huge amount of media coverage
50% of trading pairs are in BTC
It has a huge community of fanatical believers who don't sell - that keeps the price high
At least 1M of the supply is forever lost

[Anonymous No.7624083]

>>7623805
https://youtu.be/bX3EZCVj2XA

[Anonymous No.7624141]

>>7623537
Prove what? A hub can demand the entire route as a condition of using it. How is that a hard concept wtf.

[Anonymous No.7624146]

>>7623742
It won't be possible to do. That's what you're not understanding.
If they are forced to do KYC, then they won't run a hub you can route through. So what?
That's another point you can get from that readme.
You are in control of the route.
Route around them.
Not to mention, what's stopping a hub in lets say the Seychelles? You think KYC is some universal rule too?

[Anonymous No.7624274]

>>7624146
Hubs can be ran anywhere, that doesn't take away from businesses subject to KYC in their home country as they won't be able to transact with hubs not subject to KYC.

[Anonymous No.7624275]

>>7624146
>Route around them.

Route to what. If there's an American law requiring kyc for LN it's going to apply to all 'normal' payments like bitpay or all exchanges that accept American customers. Darknet markets aren't going to use LN regardless.

LN uses one address for every payment, it destroys pseudonymity of destination.

[Anonymous No.7624292]

>>7624146
>If they are forced to do KYC, then they won't run a hub you can route through.
You don't understand how the LN works. You can't just move between channels, it costs too much, and they won't be reliable anyway like that.

[Anonymous No.7624656]

What is also really funny and sad about these coretards who don't understand how lightning is actually going to work, is that it never occurs to them that it might in fact all be by design. Not that there might be a way to do second layer transactions in some fashion the does not provoke all these issues, when in fact many such solutions already exist, but that it all must just be some strange coincidence that the nice new apartment they're looking to move into looks every day more and more like an abbatoir.
It definitely couldn't possibly be that the architect sees them as cattle.