I leave for two fucking days
Jesus Christ you guys, do I have to do everything?
Yes. We're chaining you to Jimbo. Soon as he returns to lands not unbearably hot. |
|
|
|
Color me shocked. Well, no. Predictable. What did the b gold devs expect was the logical result of abandoning billions of $USD in specialized security infrastructure? |
|
|
|
Rick just came home from work and asked "What the fuck is going on with Bitcoin, man ?"
I just shrugged and replied with "No idea, dude."
What do I tell him about this dump ?
I have no idea what's going on.
I think you already gave him a honest assessment. You've set enough aside to carry you to the next halvening. Light some candles, pour a drink, cuddle, and forget about it for a while. |
|
|
|
I dont know if Satoshi ever mentioned any of this directly or even in passing, its a massive coincidence for BTC to appear around the events at that time though.
"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks" - The Genesis Block, Satoshi Nakamoto |
|
|
|
BCH has to deal with the transaction malleability bug in order to implement something like LN, which relies on the transaction id to be fixed.
Close, but not quite. The current implementation of LN requires a malleability fix (which it has accomplished by means of segwit). However, other second-layer, payment channel implementations have been designed and scenarioed which do not require such a malleability fix. (segwit fixed the transaction malleability bug.) However, someone may come up with a work around using the OPcodes. Or there may be another way to fix the transaction malleability.
BCH has for some time been discussing whether or not to adopt a malleability fix. And if so, whether segwit or some other mechanism (several have been scenarioed) would be the proper mechanism to adopt. However, I think it is low priority for the BCH team to get BCH to scale by using off chain solutions.
Agreed. While it is a longer-term issue, there are much more pressing things upon which to focus. |
|
|
|
The funny thing is, the corrupt elite banking establishment and Wall Street had fully planned to sell their overpriced corporate shares into the hands Average Joes as the economy fully recovered and was running strong again. About this point in time. Leaving the retail public holding heavy bags once again. Just like they did in 1999, and again in 2007. Then they would raise interest rates, crash the market, lower rates, money print and buy up all the cheap shares at the bottom once again. That's the only way it works for them, a repeating zero sum game.
Problem is though, their gambit didn't work this time. The economy never recovered like they hoped. Average Joe is not buying those expensive stocks. He ... now has his "eyes fully open" in terms of what Wall Street does, their lies and the games they play. Not only does Average Joe not want to buy those expensive shares this time around, he's hip to their game,
If your second quoted paragraph be true, Torque, that would be cause for hope for the future. But what evidence supports this assertion? |
|
|
|
Haha. As I pointed out to you on another thread, the total 24 hour volume for BTI is about on par with my personal 24 hour alcohol expenditure. wee! |
|
|
|
Can we talk about doom and gloom yet?
I don' know 'bout you, but I'm up several ekxs on the last 52 weeks. Doom and gloom? Ain't nobody got time for that! |
|
|
|
look its starting to pump too ===> BTI/BTC : +11.06%
Mmmm hmmm... mmm hmm. On a 24 hour volume of 0.00577 BTC. NeilDeGrasseTysonLookOutWereDealingWithABadassOverHere.png  |
|
|
|
Unlikely to launch into a 150 page tome without at least some description of why it may be relevant to my life. |
|
|
|
Ok I see. So the chain is only increasing of the actual size of the blocks an not the theoritical 32MB size.
yep. they've got the luxury of making extravagant claims while not having to deal with the problems they'd bring from maximum usage. Extravagant? More like significant. Problems? Certainly none as large as $50 transaction fees and week-long settlements. |
|
|
|
If you read that twitter stream, to this day Charlie doesn't consider Litecoin a scam.
But often we need to reconsider what the definition of a scam truly is.
I mean, to make Litecoin he literally took a snapshot of the Bitcoin source code, changed like 2 easily-found config parameters, and launched it. And he admitted that it took him all of like a long Saturday to change and test it. He put almost zero effort into creating Litecoin. He created an altcoin of Bitcoin with a few clicks of a mouse. What he did, anyone could literally do with enough knowledge of the code.
So what part about that process and goal isn't scammy?
Methinks you need to ponder upon the definitions of 'open source' and 'permissionless'. |
|
|
|
There is a big news on dark Web that Roger ver is involved with the CIA to destroy bitcoin network by manipulating bitcoin to bitcoin cash and then make it completely centralised.. Its scary what is happening
I donīt know who is coming up with such stories. Its just impossible to destroy the bitcoin network and destroying it would not help BCH at all. It would only lead to some other coins, especially the anon ones to rise bch is a sock puppet of CIA Roger ver has been doing what secret group of people been telling him that is to manipulate the entire bitcoin network bch has gone completely centralise ever since the government instructed him.. News are very scary we sometimes don't know the 90% fact Especially when stupid trolls make shit up, and other stupid trolls embellish and repeat such rumors. Cite your sources or GTFO. |
|
|
|
I heard that Bitcoin Cash has upgraded to 32MB since May 16. But I wonder how affects to the Bitcoin Cash Miners since the block size increases, it will need more memory in mining machines.
Negligible cost. Think it through. it appears they just now figured out re-enabled the original BTC blocksize? FTFY. Yup. And they also re-enabled some of the original opcodes that misguided Core devs threw out of the pram years ago. Reclaiming Bitcoin's lost legacy a step at a time. |
|
|
|
I heard that Bitcoin Cash has upgraded to 32MB since May 16. But I wonder how affects to the Bitcoin Cash Miners since the block size increases, it will need more memory in mining machines.
Negligible cost. Think it through. |
|
|
|
Points for the 'Billfodl' name. P.S.: They accept payment via Lightning Network which is also great.
Cool. How many vendors is LN up to? |
|
|
|
BTI is the original BTC fork(*circa 2014) ~ nothing you can say will ever change this fact!!  And BTI is so insignificant, it does not even appear in the 1610 coins tracked on CMC. And nothing you can say will ever change this fact!! Meanwhile, Bitcoin Cash is #4. Somehow, I don't feel that I'm missing out where it comes to this alleged first fork. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin-Instant is the real bitcoin... no one wants your bitchcash scam  lol what is bitcoin-instant? a fork or btc "core"? Unrelated. Bitcoin Instant is yet another crapcoin - with a total market cap approximately equal to the dollar value of an old rusty Yugo. For some reason, gembitz seems enamored of this trainwreck. And spams it continually on unrelated threads. good bye Bcash pussycats!!  BTI has come from the ashes to make you irrelevant once and for all. Right on cue, gembitz. Tell me, which one of you is the sock puppet? whee! |
|
|
|
Bitcoin-Instant is the real bitcoin... no one wants your bitchcash scam lol what is bitcoin-instant? a fork or btc "core"? Unrelated. Bitcoin Instant is yet another crapcoin - with a total market cap approximately equal to the dollar value of an old rusty Yugo. For some reason, gembitz seems enamored of this trainwreck. And spams it continually on unrelated threads. |
|
|
|
Is Bitcoin dead? Because somebody on reddit just told me so. Apparently it is as good as dead already and it is currently being phased out by superior crypto 2.0 coins using block-lettuce (TM) technology.
Block-lettuce? I prefer wedge-lettuce. With bacon, bleu cheese, tomato, and red onion. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
