/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>14979973

>>12039432
BCH. It is under constant brutal propaganda and otherwise attack for good reason; if it actually delivers on what the original promise of Bitcoin was, that's it, game over for states and central banks and the global financial order of the past near half century since the collapse of bretton woods and into our present fantasy system of money. That unironically would actually be amongst the greatest transfers of wealth in history, and would once again make western civilisation actually accountable to a hard money asset, with everything that implies.
If BCH dies we get to a very, very bad place. Potential replacement candidates are DASH, NANO, DCR, XMR, ZEC, but all of them have their drawbacks and hangups, and we would have lost massive momentum and initiative to abandon the original ledger that got us to this point. Ideally BCH really does just need to win, despite all the attacks in the world against it. If it can face down the absolute constant storm of steel with which it is faced and still prevail, it will be unstoppable when the enemy finally runs out of steam and actually has to compete rather than play dirty tricks.

>>11791066
That's just wrong. BCH was created because core segwit was abandoning the end of the original bitcoin, pic related. Nothing more, nothing less. It wasn't about preserving means, it was about preserving ends. And we have ample evidence over the past year that the fork in question was absolutely necessary, given the failure of lightning, and the capitulation of the system to bakkt and liquid. Everything the OG Cashers said about core came true. They are indisputably right. And if SV ever ends up in the same position they too can "I told you so" until the cow comes home.
But right now it doesn't look like they ever will be.

>>11754892

>>11661165
You brainlet, if the difficulty gets pumped towards the adjustment right as the war starts and people start renting BTC hash rate for it then we could see mempools like November last like this brainlet >>11661323
remembers but doesn't seem to remember the $100 fees

Segwit sucks blockstream's Fu ked

>>11597136
It will make for a tasty snack before the main course.

>>11387204
BTC will send a secretary to get a coffee and report back later after having like 10 coffees.

At best LN will add unnecessary complicated steps to an otherwise simple payment system.
>but it's muh butcoin
Normies can't wait to start creating links!

>>11015233
Most BTC holders are just still not aware what is going on.
The speculants that sold BCH immediately after the fork are the ones who are defending LN to their graves and they repeat the same mantras so they and eventually others would believe it:
>Bitcoin can't scale on chain
>Big blocks mean decentralization
>Building a new layer is inevitable
>Using LN is simple, everyone will do it
>etc
People who hold both forks are open minded and are able to at least question the validity of these claims. People who sold their BCH will keep defending these no matter what.

>>10647421
I was a hardcore BCH hater at first, but eventually their arguments made more sense than mine and I switched all my miners to it.
The reason people hate it is because it complicates things.
>I bought BTC, I will eventually get rich because this is the only legit crypto
This is the underlying belief and when you challenge it, the typical result is emotional insults. It's easier to say 'BCash LOL' than actually research what's going on.

>contribution to society
>honest living
>I would be bored
These are memes, not legit excuses.
Repeat after me:
>I am a slave. I need a master to tell me what to do because I don't know any better.

NEETing doesn't have to be watching a ime 24/7. I haven't worked for 6 months. I have done some independent online machine learning courses, bought some hifi audio equipment for luls, work on my own startup a bit, got a ferret, read books and really enjoy life. The only thing I wish is that I had more friends who wouldn't waste their life away as slaves so I could enjoy this stuff with them. Most of my friends are tired all the time and overly pessimistic because of wage cucking, it's just sad.

>>9546838
Your side is stuck firmly to the end of Maxwell's cock. Nothing more, nothing less. And he is a proven bildeberg AXA mastercard stooge. You're ignoring that fact doesn't change it.

My side is... What the fucking white paper defined bitcoin as ten years ago.

And I give less than a fuck about your internecine bitching about your fellow corecucks.

>>9477505
Sorry, but you're just wrong.

>>9469579
See the 2 nodes with lots of connections?? The banks own them. Bahahahaahahahahahah

>>9440107
I support your view. I see the government as another form of parents
>don't do this
>don't do that
For 90% of people that is OK, they actually need parents all their lives.
But for the rest it is fucking annoying and we have had no choice but to live with the same rules.
With crypto and anonymous tech it will be possible to transcend the government control once you're ready for it.

Bitcoin core is windows 10
Bitcoin cash is like an upgraded windows 7
Ethereum is linux

>>9408057
All of the other shit you said makes zero sense in light of the fact that BCH is actually bitcoin. So yeah. No co-opting going on in this side.
On *your* fucking side however, you cunts do nothing but co-opt. You demand the original name and exchange code when the product has practically nothing architecturally significant keeping with the original vision and sure as fuck isn't p2p cash. You fearmonger about our side of the fork being subversion when your side is financed by fucking axa and the bildeberg group, and forces almost all transactions through kiked third party hubs.
Everything you say is a lie and you are literally cancer and should kill yourself.
As for living together, the nature of rivalrous bidding for hash power means there can be only one. And it's not going to be the hijacked fucking kike coin. Deal with it.

>>9382898
> being this fucking retarded.
Amazing.
So 32mb is impossible to run anywhere except data centers. The US government is behind the coin all the ancaps have gathered around and we should pay no attention to their sponsored dev team that forced through segwit and officially plans to push over 99 percent of the transaction throughput into a routed and staked centralised hub and spoke network which necessarily will force said volume through massive lightning banks, right, got it.
You're so fucking retarded it's just funny. The usg sabotaging the project clumsily and in plain view and having fucking idiots like you rushing to their defense and attacking the immune system of bitcoin must have them in fucking stitches.

>>9370849
No, it's not. https://www.slideshare.net/mobile/peter_r/a-segwit-coin-is-not-a-bitcoin
And if the vast majority of transactions have to go through lightning, and lightning is not peer to peer, then neither is the entire rube goldberg machine.
It's not just cobra, plenty of other coretards doing the same thing. Basically everyone who legitimately noticed they made an altcoin and now see they need to rewrite history so it isn't so obvious.

>>9352521
>Bitcoin CASH

>>9339254
I had a job offer from SBI, I know who and what they are. They're Japanese, their interests are massively divergent from the wall street fucks that sabotaged the original BTC, Japan's entire approach to crypto is a way to leverage their unwanted heavily held US debt that they're unable to offload due to being technically occupied, the last thing they want is for the US to be able to dig their claws even deeper in using BTC as a hook instead. Their interests are not at all aligned with those wallstreet fucks.
All of asia just wants a genuine reliable global currency, and that is exactly what BCH is going to be, and all the BTC kikery in the world isn't going to change that. That you idiots don't even understand you've sabotaged a chain that will dissolve out from under you because you've also compromised the value proposition of it is just icing on the cake.

>>9185154
"Valid chain"
If the miners mined the chain and the exchanges still sold the chain, but it had changed consensus so the inflation rate was in the millions per day, would it still be bitcoin? Nobody would say yes. What about if the developers of the largest node software blacklisted 99 percent of the address space so that the amount of potential users more adequately reflected the actual serviceable capacity given their artificially imposed on chain transaction limits? Nobody would say yes.
The only reason this particular idiotic change sounds like it has any degree of approval is;
1) it is shilled and astroturfed harder than anything since Bill Clinton's wife in the last election. You can clearly demonstrate this by attending bitcoin meetups in the real world and noting just how unpopular the move is, or any sybil proof online poll that requires something like keys and stake to generate has enormously different results than the easily attackable astroturfed outlets like reddit, Twitter and 4chan.
2) all that shilling has confused technically ignorant people into thinking it's a good idea.
Both of those things could very easily apply to the supply limit to millions of percent inflation per day. The entire global finance industry has a lot more astroturf ammo than blockstream, and there are even more stupid people than just the current set of core idiots.
Therefore any divergence from the actual original plan can only legitimately be executed one way, hard fork and change the name. Otherwise it's no longer the valid chain.