Bitcoin Forum

Wall Observer
A free service brought to you by the bcash community

Whenever there is a significant change in market depth, please update this thread with a new depth chart, and a good price chart with some TA is also welcome, feel free to comment on these if you have something to worth contributing, ( if your post is not at all TA it will be deleted )

Posting guild lines:
 Please lets keep this thread clean. ( I will be removing any off topic posts )
 Do not post random comments on this thread, unless it is directly related to the last wall update (ex. The 20K ask was was NOT sold into, it was removed after being tested)
 When you post a chart please use livecoinwatch.com or whatever other bcash site has charts

---

BCH/BTC price is also valid as most people just care about how many free bitcoins they get from the bcash gift to bitcoin hodlers.

looks like a good time to short bcash :)

https://i.imgur.com/UVPMWdv.png
text book pump and dump shitcoin
plummeting like a stone today

Bitcoin [Cash] is king! Get rekt smallblocktards!

Haha ok. First page real estate. Send bids to Anon136 via private message. :D

That war waged between BTC and BCH in the original Wall Observer (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.406100 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.406100)) thread has gone too far  :D

BCH has been done, yep.  Ok how about a war with another coin? One that will put up a credible fight, maybe....

Will bcash cure my asthma?

OP is out to sea.  There was never a 20k ask.  Or if there was, it was too far out to see.  Or Sea, instead  :D

When lambo?

https://i.imgur.com/LLIIhgO.jpg

bcash lambo??

Is that bcash badger?

^^^^ Soooo... no moon!??

P.S.: No, seriously... I still have around one third of my initial bcash. I do care... somehow. Mixed feelings, though.

What are you doing with your life? Dump that shit. Not just for practical reasons do it on principle. There can be only one bitcoin, no sense being wishy washy about it. The only reason bcash has had any success at all is because of people holding it "just in case", "I better hedge". You gotta decide bro. What is bitcoin?

THERE CAN BE
    ONLY ONE
https://media1.tenor.com/images/d040459fe767b3eb5dab1e7c74db42e6/tenor.gif?itemid=5501219

It is always a good time to short bcash in my opinion. It's a total shitcoin that is run by greedy capitalists. Thats the problem with bcash. They try too much and call themselves the "real" bitcoin when in reality all they did was change block size. What else have they done? Nothing yet aside from call bitcoin a fraud and cause crashes.

Hey bro, no Bitcoin shilling here. This is the BCASH WO!!!!

Bigger blocks and all that shit, you know.

Stop killing babies you Bitcoin maximalist!!

BCASH BCASH BCASH!!!!

Hey dude, I am serious....   >:(

On an existential level, how can we know for sure, which is the real bitcoin...

I mean like really, this is important?

Last August, like there were like two forks at the same time, and then afterwards, there were additional forks, and I am confused, dude.  I kind of feel like I should buy some of each fork, just to be covered.

Can some dude or anyone (dude or not) explain to me this real issues about the original bitcoin (or the real one)?

https://1843magazine.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/styles/article-main-image-overlay/public/0212ILIN01-web.jpg

I am not joking....  >:( >:(  and you can tell because I have a serious face.

Sirs, when next pump?
I am very belief that coin. Mr Very is hansome gentlmen and clever devoloper.
Is cunning plan make blocks biig like that 32, so can squize out smoller nodes - fuck their mothers if they wan fuck, like say Uncle Wu self.
Rich coin only for rich guy like Uncle Ayre. just burn it in mines haha

get ready folks FLIPPING in one hour

looks like the flipping is off . -10% today
but but but they said ???

You need to sell your bcash for copper and nickel! That is the only true money.

The world is run by Pentecostal Holiness, only holding copper and nickel can stop them!

I am not a friend of bitcoin cash because I think a lot of pump and dump is going on there. I sold it while the first pump after the it was claimable and I will never buy it back because I am a too strong Bitcoin believer.

I am very disappointed to see that not even the OP is a true believer anymore.

... And where are the quality TA? And what's the point of all this racist shit?

If you guys can't get serious I will dump all my bcash and move on to other things.

Please do. It's garbage. WTF are you waiting for?

It’s all over guys.

https://preview.ibb.co/cP8grx/0_B966592_E18_F_4_EB5_B937_5_F2936_FFD9_FD.jpg (https://ibb.co/iwv5Jc)

Come on dude! it is a very lame move selling bch, we got it from the fork and there is nothing to lose in HODLing it... If we sell bch, it would be very scary to HODL bitcoin too. I know people will hate what am saying but come on - let's face the reality that these two coins are threat to one another. Let's play safe and HODL both. In fact, the price is not bad at all... who knows maybe next year it would reach $8000, there is no harm in HODLing it.

I am waiting for THE SIGNAL.

If we all work hard enough, bcash can become PayPal 2.0!

https://coinjournal.net/roger-ver-paypal-acceptable-risk-bitcoin/

(Team) Roger and BCachers are a cancer to crypto.

https://i.imgur.com/YXCU3fZ.png

But he's 'Jesus' - the face we are proud to have as the arse face of our coin.

https://preview.ibb.co/cpmwPH/7072_F9_D9_E95_A_457_B_B09_B_BE464_F485677.jpg (https://ibb.co/c4Csyc)

But BCash in the thread name! Roger Ver will be so sad, how could you do such a thing?!?

Roger is welcome anytime here, we are funny people who like to tease others from time to time. Only one thing is not for us: we do not play with Bitcoin. Full stop. Hijacking Bitcoin in such a manner was utterly childish. On the long run we'll see which coin will survive

There are 34 million bitcoins in existence, and 8 million left to be mined.
You can take that to the bank. (of China)

https://i.imgur.com/dnGTU9R.jpg
is Very good sensorship. no mercy no ragrets strong mods r/btc is bestest

Bear flag spotted. Smallblocktard financial terrorists must be hard at work again.


https://www.tradingview.com/i/V18Rp9AF/

This is a perfect summary of why bitcash is even still a thing. It is exactly this attitude. No sorry. Holding bcash is validating bullshit. I refuse to do it. I'm not saying your argument is wrong, it's just that holding bcash "just in case" would make me feel dirty.

Each to their own. Isn't free market a wonderful thing?

The competition is good.

There are rules on the free market, otherwise thieves would steal everything. One rule is not to confuse buyers with fake presenting what you are selling. If you say you are selling Bitcoin but indeed you are selling some worthless fork you are a thief. There's nothing "free" in supporting the scammers.

https://image.ibb.co/jrFnGx/09_C6_CC12_D76_F_4_A2_B_8_F9_B_20_ADB51_D9047.jpg (https://imgbb.com/)

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

https://i.imgur.com/VHdtXTP.jpg
clever gentkmen Professor Rizup suggest make obvios problem smol blocks
genuous 10/10

now I'm just waiting for that Mrpumperoids dude to show up.... ;D

no

The only thing bcash cured was stopping an endless supply of Bitcoin Unlimited, Bitcoin Classic, etc.

BCHs aint shit but hos & tricks!

Is Bcash dead again?

Yes
http://bitcoincomlawsuit.info/

Anyone else going to the bcash conference in Hong Kong this month?

https://coingeek.com/conference/agenda/

They will have such innovative speakers as Jihan Wu in the morning, Roger Ver and Craig Wright in the afternoon then Jihan Wu, Craig Wright and Roger Ver on a panel discussion later in the afternoon.

Then you can meet notable people at the after party such as Roger Ver, Craig Wright and Jihan Wu.

Don't miss this exciting conference with so many bcash experts!

moon then?

Big pump in Korea 8)

Maybe one day bcash will be back to .2 BTC...and maybe this thread will reach .2 Wall Observer BTC/USD...

need someone to pump the posts

Could be called Scammers United Conference. There will be a lot of knowledge shared to anyone who is planning to implement another shady concept in cryptocoin space. Learn from the best.

Shitcoin Conference United Movement...

bitcoincash conference?

more like shitcoinbash, amirite??

No you're right. Nothing to lose... except your manhood.

bcash is utter shitcoin

So the "real" Bitcoin is a trusted centralized setup now?

You just can't make this shit up.

wtf is this shit??

some kinda joke??

I wish it were. Roger Ver bought @Bitcoin on Twitter.

That guy is walking talking cancer. Why cant he just find a hole somewhere, crawl inside it and spare the rest of humanity.

CONFIRMED

Hey gang, I just saw that BitPay is shilling for bcash!

When you go to pay with bitcoin they show you two options, bitcoin or bcash. Then they set a minimum network fee for bitcoin and show you the network fee for both. The last time I went to pay for something it showed bitcoin network fee cost of 13 cents and 0 cents for bcash (even though the mempool was empty).

Add to that, Coinbase is dropping its payment services.

So pretty soon, any merchant accepting bitcoin in the US will be actively encouraging people to use bcash!

Bcash to the moon!

Thank you BitPay!

  -9% today . another day another fork another drop

The levels of how low Ver and his shills can go got to rock bottom:

https://blog.bitcoin.com/the-story-of-how-bitcoin-was-compromised/ (https://blog.bitcoin.com/the-story-of-how-bitcoin-was-compromised/)

They will rather see the whole concurrency idea damaged then to admit they blew it with their altcoin. They are not even hiding it any more, this is Bitcoin.com site, which many people can wrongly believe represents Bitcoin.

On a crypto market green day we can all go to the regular wall observer to feel good. On a red day we can come here to feel good. A thread for every market condition!

If you say you are selling Bitcoin but indeed you are selling some worthless fork you are a thief. There's nothing "free" in supporting the scammers.

There is alot of truth mixed in there, people did not support Segwit because we were promised Seg2X. There was a big setup there and people got played. Bitcoin needs a dynamic block size but Asics can't handle it so basically it's being torn apart by greed. Bip 141.142 IIRc. Shit I can't remeber 6 months ago. :)

Either way everyone except the moneymen got played and BTC doesn't have a dynamic blocksize, thats pretty much the facts in my mind.

Oh heck yes! Somebody who finally gets it!


https://i.gifer.com/4WF3.gif

That's bullshit.  N0 one was promised Segwit2x.  There was a backdoor agreement, aka NY agreement that some insiders attempted to play off as a possible path towards segwit2x, and it was a kind of hostage play that did not work out and kind of exploded when both the useractivated softfork and the BIP91 proposal allowed for a path of achieving consensus on segwit, prior to 2x.  2x was not test, and more importantly it was not as accepted by the bitcoin community as it was propagandized as being.... So, yeah, segwit2x was an attempted trick that backfired, rather than a "promise," as you assert.

  Sure some people got played, but that playing of people probably came more from the misleading aspects of the ny agreement, and folks within that agreement attempting to suggest more to come out of that (including the 2x aspect) than they were capable of delivering because for the most part, the bitcoin community did not want that 2x crap in part because 1) it had not been shown to be necessary, 2) had been tested and 3) was not even close to likely to receive consensus without at least establishing 1 & 2, first.


If bitcoin were to need a dynamic block size, then it seems that something like that would be implemented into it and achieved.  Seem that currently, things are going pretty fucking well for bitcoin, in terms of the greater use of segwit, decent transaction times, relatively low fees, fending off and disincentivising spam attacks, progression of second layer solutions, such as lightning network, and actual real world evidence from the bcash shill nutjobs that BIG blocks are really stupid, unjustified and counter-productive, so those old talking points about the supposed emergency to "so something" with bitcoin, "anything", including "increasing the blocksize" are not convincing, and even some of the newbies are recognizing the value of bitcoin and the vacuousness of various "bitcoin is broken" talking points.


Funny that you are making your "bitcoin is broken" arguments in the bcash WO thread... Why not just join the Bcashers and build upon that BIG blocker confirmed platform?  Anyhow, your facts about the "need" for a bitcoin dynamic block size seems to be weak at best, yet I still don't really understand why you complain about bitcoin when you gots ur selfie some bcash to work with that solves and focuses on that particular BIG blocker solution... What it wrong with that?  Be gone to bcash, right?

No, this is definitely the place for the bitcoin vs bcash debate. The moderator for this thread openly supports such discussion here. If it were to infiltrate the bitcoin part of bitcointalk it would just become annoying as hell. In the altcoin section it makes sense.

I believe that my frustration is that Heuristic is not really talking about bcash, but instead he is misdescribing what bitcoin is, and also saying what he wished bitcoin would be, which is something that bcash already attempts to differentiate itself by.

In other words, Heuristic does not seem to be suggesting to come over to bcash because bcash has the preferred BIG blocker features (from his point of view), but instead he is whining that 1) bitcoin is supposedly broken for the false reasons that he asserted without even really talking about how bcash has the features and 2) that bitcoin needs to be fixed because it is lacking those features (which is not really even on the bcash topic because he does not make such a connection in his post).

All I know is that it's been a long time since bcash has been pumped and I'm hoping to get more free money damnit.

Come on bcashers. Pump that shit.

I don't support Bcash because it does not have the majority support, I think it should die. Just because I said bitcoin isn't perfect don't put words into my mouth. There is a shit ton of problems that need to be addressed which I doubt the current model will be able to get done as proven by the Bcrap fiasco. And from the outside the entire mess makes BTC look like a disorganized bunch of fools. I support BTC because it's what we have and we need freedom from the oligarchy but when something comes along thats better with similar support then I will get behind that in it's place. I am not a blind fool that just prays at the BTC altar. BTC is not the end all solution it is a stepping stone. I'm sorry if I don't tote your party line, I tend to not do that in any community.


Yeah, what you said except Big Block =/= Dynamic either. I was just pointing out where there was a little truth in that post.

You guys are too Entrenched you think everyone has to be in your camp exclusively or they are the enemy.

BTW it's spelled Hueristic.


This is all its good for if anything, a P$D shitcoin.

War? We are here like peace and not war. Wkwkkwk
Bch is not really good for me but i dont know why there are many supporter who support this behind.
I saw the movement of the price last time is very quick and maybe thats why bch has so many suporter

I am not putting words into your mouth.  You are complaining that bitcoin is not sufficiently scaling from your perspective and you were advocating BIGGER blocks, implying that bitcoin is broken without such supposed "dynamic" innovation.



What are the problems?  Bitcoin is working and there are people working on bitcoin.  Other coins are largely just attacks on bitcoin or perhaps cause some kind of incentive for innovations to take place faster, but that does not mean that there are "problems" that are either worthy as categorizing as problems or quantifying as "shit ton" because bitcoin is a paradigm shifting innovation and the glass is much more half full than it is half empty in terms of where bitcoin is going, but instead seems like you want to focus on the supposed problems rather than a lot of the innovations and benefits that are already present through the whole thing, aka bitcoin.


You can choose to look at it that way.  Bitcoin is not some centralized company that is spinning the good bad and the ugly... instead it is open source, which causes its own problems, including innefficiencies, people complaining about the direction, people stealing code and attempting to suggest that either they are the real bitcoin or bitcoin 2.0, and people attacking bitcoin because it is open source.

Some of the innefficiencies that you assert to be problems seem to be features rather than bugs when we are talking about a decentralized and open source system.. and the foundations of bitcoin should really cause a lot of inspiration that bitcoin is still conquering the space in spite of the various perceived inneficiencies... furthermore, those of us (likely including yourself) have a considerable potential to profit from the fact that bitcoin looks a whole hell of a lot more disorganized and messy than it is.. and in the end, none of the bullshit nonsense about it being broken, supposedly, is going to end up taking away its long term value, even though in the short term there are going to be perceptions that bitcoin is more of a cluster-fuck than it really is (in other words, feature rather than the bug(s) that you seem to be suggesting).


Nothing wrong with that.  I am moving to something better when it comes  along too, but we are a long fucking way from that and seems like there is nothing even close, yet.


Good for you.  I am not sure if you are trying to suggest that you are more pure and logical and smarter because you believe that dynamic blocks are needed, and that does not seem to be the case.  There is little to no evidence or logic that dynamic blocksizes are needed as you seem to be asserting.


You can believe whatever you like.


You don't need to tote any party line, it is not necessary.  You made some nonsense assertions that bitcoin is supposedly broken because it doesn't have dynamic blocks or something goofy like that and you coming off as if you have some kind of wisdom on this point, when you have not backed it up with evidence or logic.


Who knows what you are talking about, then?


Who is entrenched?  You brought up some nutty post and you have not backed it up, and supposedly you have some kind of innovative knowledge?   Since you seem to want to continue to argue some kind of innovative and creative point, I am continuing to wonder what the supposed point is, besides making a false assertion that "you guys are entrenched"?


O.k.  fair enough.

Fair enough, I posted my opinion and really don't want to debate it. If you don't agree that fine. The transaction cost do to scaling is unacceptable IMO and therefore it is my opinion that BTC is in need of repair and dynamic blocksize would help. I'm not sure why that was somehow nutty to you. I wish I had the energy to get into this discussion but I don't. Why don't you link me to your sides revisionist history so I can compare the two. :P Usually the truth is in the middle although I'm pretty sure it's not close to the bcrap side in this case.

I may not have been clear I sometimes don't balance my meds well. :)

I believe that I do not have any burden to show evidence or to show logic to maintain the status quo, because I am not asserting that anything is broken.  My understanding is that things in Bitcoin are going quite splendedly.    In about mid-2015, there began to be some arguments put forth that bitcoin needed blockchain size increases, and there were proposals such as XT and classic and unlimited, and none of those proposals were very persuasive, but increasingly caused a lot of whining about bitcoin being broken, supposedly.  Furthermore, there were some spam attacks in order to attempt to provide evidence that fees were too high and that transaction times were too slow, and there were further attempts at suggesting that bitcoin was somehow broken.  In late 2015, segwit was proposed as a possible scaling solution and in early to mid 2016 segwit was tested and in late 2016, segwit voting went live.  There was not a lot of voting support for segwit and it tended to float in the 20% arena, and in early 2017, some closed shop nutjobs came on some resolution (aka NY agreement) to attempt to force through segwit2x.  That segwit2x baloney caused some other forced alternatives such as USASF and then compromises, such as BIP 91 that allowed segwit to go forward first and also allowed for miners to make a choice, and really at that point segwit came to consensus and locked in however, the BIGBLOCKER nutjobs did not like the fact that segwit was going to likely resolve a lot of their nonsensical talking points about the supposed high fees and slow transaction times, so therefore, they decided to perform a renegade hardfork, which later became Bcash... that also ended up largely failing to sabotage bitcoin in terms of their real agenda to attempt to undermine bitcoin's governance and to make it easier to make changes in bitcoin. ... anyhow, a lot of the nutjobber proposals about bitcoin failing to scale are not really justified in terms of facts or logic, and they continue to have the burden to show facts and/or logic about how bitcoin is supposedly broken and how your proposed solution (including some ill-defined proposal of "dynamic blocks") is going to solve more problems than it causes or that it should be adopted into bitcoin...

So, in essence, what I am saying Hueristic is that any kind of burden to show that there is a needed change in bitcoin is on you and not on me, and personally, I believe that bitcoin is going in a lovingly direction, and changes are coming along great enough for people to continue to adopt and to build on top of its various apparatus, whether they are planning to operate on chain or off chain, so I continue to also believe that bitcoin is very undervalued, and that transaction times and fees are very adequate and likely to adequately adapt through time with systems that are already in place.  There seems to be no emergency in bitcoin and no rush, and changes are coming along adequately, even though it is possible that more spam attacks may come in the future, there seem to have been fewer successes in spam attacking bitcoin since the most recent one that lasted largely between December 2017 and January 2018.

Well said, I appreciate the nice encapsulated timeline you just provided. I didn't read the arguments that were going on during the 2X time and didn't realize you term "bigblockers" was referring to the 8mb crowd so now I understand why you were throwing that term at me. I personally just hate bandaids so even though segwit is in and we're at 4mb it doesn't change the fact that it is a short term fix. If it has to have the same issue addressed in the future that just had to be addressed then by definition doesn't that make it broken? Kicking the can down the road is not acceptable and that is a fundamental flaw in most every part of the world we live in and is not to be accepted but to be changed as a rule. that is all I ever see is problems getting kicked down the road for others to fix. This is a movement that I thought had more foresight than that. But I guess it's inherent in the system itself, the flaw is us not being able to agree because of self interest. And no I don't have an answer to that nor to how a dynamic size can be accomplished. I also have not read that much on lightning as from what little I do understand on the subject sidechains are less secure and therefore it's just another bandaid.

You seem to maintain some kind of presumption that there is something broken in bitcoin.  Yeah, bitcoin was designed as a kind of unlimited, but somewhere along the early day times, a 1mb blocksize limit was put into place.  Like you mentioned, segwit seems to have caused some theoretical ability to go up to 4mb while maintaining a 1mb blocksize limit.. something like that.

Apparently there is batching and other processing of transactions that can be monitored to see whether blocks are filling up or if there is some way to address the issue, whether you suggest it is a bandaid or not, you are presuming that there is something wrong with the resolution that achieved consensus... and that is segwit...

there is no consensus about increasing blocks, such as increasing to 2mb or anything else, even though quite a few technically knowledgable bitcoin supporters have conceded that "someday" "perhaps" an actual blocksize limit might be necessary, but we are not there at this time, and in that regard, it becomes a BIG SO WHAT because it is a theoretical future that is not currently here.

The fact that the need for 2mb is not here does not mean that BITCOIN has implemented a bandaide solution. 

In fact, segwit provides for all kinds of possibilities for bitcoin to be built upon, including lightning network and sidechains, and the combination of on chain and off chain solutions have to be seen in actual practice before we conclude that they are insufficient as bandaids. 

Such supposed short term solution could last several years or 20 years, and in the mean time, bitcoin continues to be used and continues to be developed, so when you assert that segwit is a short term fix, you seem to be picking up some non-specific talking point without really saying why it may not end up being a long term fix... we do not know the future, so how are we going to know about how all of this is going to play out in terms of on chain traffic, versus off chain traffic.  Let's say for example that on chain traffic seems to go to slow and fees are getting too high, then at that time, would it not justify considering whether blockchain size limits need to be increased, but we are not there and such thoughts are theoretical rather than actual.



If the issue has to be addressed in 20 years, then surely we could have people planning for such future, but it does not mean that the solution should be implemented at this time.     



I don't see that as a problem... the system is fit for currently, and scaling is likely going to always be a bit of an issue, to build the system BIG enough for currently, but not too BIG.  There are downsides to building a system that is TOO BIG, so from my understanding, there continues to be a concern that TOO BIG could lock folks out... and there are also arguments for smaller at the current time...


You seem to be just making shit up.  Others do not need to fix anything if it is not broken, and when the scaling solution of "BIGGER" becomes necessary, then that is the time that such BIGGER system would go into place.. NOT SOONER than necessary.


Again, you are implying such system to be broken.  My understand that having a system that is difficult to change is a feature and NOT a bug for it maks it much more difficult for whimsical folks to attempt to fuck with a system that is not broken... and one of the great values of bitcoin remains that it is a system that allows for true and meaningful decentralized proof of work and incentives around that, and developers can build upon it without worrying that it is going to be changed to some shitty thing, such as bcash and not going to become controlled by any group such as bcash seems to be.. with Ver, Jihan wu and craig wright.



Bitcoin is built to be difficult to change and consensus difficult to achieve and seems to be progressing in a great direction, even though it is a decentralized sytem, we are very lucky that bitcoin did not implode or blow up because of the many attacks over the past few years... and we are lucky that segwit got adopted through regular consensus mechanisms, including in early to mid-2017 what had seemed to be a near impossible feat to achieve more than 95% consensus.  fucking amazing... and 2x nor any other onchain increase of the blockchain size limit had come even close to achieving that kind of consensus.. and has not even been testing, except perhaps if you consider bcash to be a testing ground for onchain scaling?



It seems to me that a BIP would have to be submitted first and get peer reviewed and accepted, and thereafter tested and then thereafter get adopted into the bitcoin system, if it were to get past the first several steps?  Once it gets accepted then there would be a determination whether it would need to be a hardfork or a softfork, with considerable reluctancies seeming to exist in bitcoin in regards to hardforks... but anyhow, if it were a hardfork, then perhaps 95% consensus would need to be achieved, too, before it were to actually go live onto the bitcoin network?


Lightning and sidechains seem to be in pretty early stages, so why would we be complaining that neither lightning nor sidechains work if we do not know how they are going to be implemented.  My understanding is that both lightning and sidechains can already be built upon systems that already exist in bitcoin, but it is just a matter of testing and adopting which can take a while, as we can see with lighting network having been started in a kind of test mode on bitcoin since January 2018, and nodes continuing to be added.  I am supposing that the longer that lightning is tested and expanded then it will become adopted more and the values that are transacted will increase, too.

I'm just wondering why it has to be moderated, you don't have to erase something because negative comments about Bcash is already been posted in every Bcash thread discussion. Let's just accept the fact that Bcash cannot beat Bitcoin.

I accept that fact 100%

To keep out pictures of grandpa porn.

Outside of that...this is only for discussion of the bcash price movement.

I will crack down on any post that is off topic immediately.

And by crack down I mean read.

You are really beginning to come off as a crack pot, and by that I mean to ad homily attack uie.

Is that off-topic enough for you?

Bcash shilling rules!!!!!   GO BCASH, GO!!!!!!!!!!! [down] :P :P

Was watching this and I think he states what I was trying to say in a much more concise manner. Good thing as I was not wanting to come back in here and clarify point by point. ;

https://youtu.be/_Iisu0snIL0?t=3076

Is Bcash dead? No moon? No lambo?

I watched your 1 hour video link above of Edward Snowden, and it appears to me that Snowden is being interviewed as some kind of bitcoin conference, yet Snowden does not really seem to know a lot about bitcoin or cryptos.

Sure, Snowden is a bright guy, and he really seems to frame a lot of his world focus and views based on privacy and based on issues with the government, but it surely seems to me that he has not really consciously identified or prioritized the revolutionary nature of bitcoin. 

By the way, Snowden mentioned that he is a fan of zcash and monero, and he likes those coins for their privacy features - but he does not seem to appreciate the potential future contributions of Bitcoin's lightning network to evolve similar and possibly more powerful features due to the likely future greater bitcoin liquidity.

Block size still not big enough.

Need another simple hard fork to double the block size.

Then moon.

Higher block size = bigger price.

The only thing bcash cured was stopping an endless supply of Bitcoin Unlimited, Bitcoin Classic, etc.

What kinda cuck only doubles the block size when he forks.

Deep scientific analysis showed 4MB blocks are far from enough. Exact measurements using Flux Capacitor gave this result: 100MB blocks needed -> then moon.

It would nice to see both ETH and Bcash in the double digits price arena... yet could be based on number of units in the supply that per unit ETH could continue to be half the unit price of Bcash - yet who knows with the bcash forkening that seems to be continuing, which could cause some additional bcash catching up to ETH in terms of unit price.. who knows with these highly marketed and pump coins, they surely seem to retain some pump potential regarding either one of them and some manipulators who don't mind pumping them just do raise some hype, create some momentum and to attempt to profit off of such considerable liquidity that those coins have as compared to coins that are much further down the CMC.