What's the metric then? Price, average number of transactions, all of them can be faked and manipulated (BCash is a good example), consensus is not obvious, and miners (Bcash - jihan) do not always follow the money, they play a longer game.
It's become common to use the word "consensus" like we all know what it means, but I don't think its easy to define and its definately not easy to measure.
With Bitcoin I can buy things from tens of thousands of merchants across the world. With BCash I can't buy anything from any merchant. Save maybe Ver's one favorite coffee shop in Timbuktu. Merchants follow the consensus of most end user usage. You really want to tell me that the "metric" between these two is somehow nebulous or not easy to measure? Even outside of commerce, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who could logically dispute that Bitcoin is the most widely held coin (in terms of # users who hodl it). Although I agree that it's not easy to accurately measure that beyond # of non-zero accounts. The idea of consensus also contains a major element of trust. Bitcoin has earned the most "trust" above all others. |
|
|
|
Consensus is a very nebulous concept, miners, users, merchants, full nodes, loud twitter trolls, who determines what constitues it, and what/who determines the result.
I'm not quite sure why you say this about consensus being nebulous. Like at all. It is crystal clear. The real Bitcoin is the coin/fork that the most end users are buying and using because they all agree on its value (consensus) relative to and above all the others. Miners simply follow the money, and mine what is selling the most and best to make profit (the incentive). Brokers and merchants also follow what is most popular in usage. Why are people trying to make this harder than it is? |
|
|
|
Didn't you know this is the Wall Observer Maximalist thread. I know exactly what you mean but risk being shouted at to say that here  On the date of the bitcoin cash fork. Bitcoin core forked too didn't they? That was when segwit was activated. The original bitcoin in reality is an etheric and ambigous thing which probably no longer exists. The real shit slinging match is over the brand. "Wall Observer BTC/USD" You may be confused by /r/btc, but BTC is Bitcoin. You're more than welcome to create a Bcash or Bitcoin Pizza Wall Observer thread in the altcoin section. As far as the "original" Bitcoin, I'm sure you can find a copy of Satoshi's original software release from 2009, but you're going to be the only one running it. And you'd be missing out on some amazing new features, which have allowed Bitcoin to scale relatively well without increasing the blocksize or increasing centralization. I would still like to see any of these supposed non-'Bitcoin Maximalists' dispute or debate, either logically, philosophically or otherwise, the statement I made just earlier today. When confronted with the undeniable truth, they just tuck their tail and run away. The "real Bitcoin" is the one that the majority of end users agree on through belief and mutual consensus of Bitcoin's fundamental attributes and philosophical values.
That's it. Period. The majority of end users decides. It literally is a popularity contest.
It has nothing to do with what Ver thinks, what miners think, what brokers/exchanges think, what developers think, what features, which has the biggest block size or fastest transactions, which was "first", which one "closest to Satoshi's original vision", which is objectively "better", or better for humanity, better for the planet/ecosystem, or any of that other garbage.
Consensus decides what Bitcoin is. If, sometime in the future, consensus dictates that Bcash is the real Bitcoin, I would acknowledge that. However, I'd also acknowledge that Bitcoin has failed, and I would disengage from the space altogether, and focus on Monero or something.
Exactly this. +1000. |
|
|
|
Sarcasm or reverse psychology? Lol |
|
|
|
Bitcoin has risen 47% from it's low. Whoop de doo. How can you be happy about that, when, meanwhile, ETH and XRP are up 100%, dog is up 120%, and BeeCash is up 155%? What the hell? So infuriating.
It is enough to know they are all shitcoins and all will return to zero, with the possible exception of ETH. Bitcoin has now become the "safe haven" asset of the crypto world.  |
|
|
|
Bcash is a fork. Bgold is a fork. These are forks of Bitcoin. This is the least complicated thing ever.  Let me be clear guys. I share your opinion. It is my opinion as well that bitcoin core is the real bitcoin. All I am arguing is that that is my opinion and not a fact that is in some way objectively valid. In what fundamental sense is bcash different from bitcoin core that makes it the fork and not bitcoin core the fork of it? Bitcoin core has changed the consensus algorithm too just like bcash. We used to not have segwit enabled and bcash used to not have massive blocks. One isn't "the fork" they are each forks of the other. The "real Bitcoin" is the one that the majority of end users agree on through belief and mutual consensus of Bitcoin's fundamental attributes and philosophical values. That's it. Period. The majority of end users decides. It literally is a popularity contest. It has nothing to do with what Ver thinks, what miners think, what brokers/exchanges think, what developers think, what features, which has the biggest block size or fastest transactions, which was "first", which one "closest to Satoshi's original vision", which is objectively "better", or better for humanity, better for the planet/ecosystem, or any of that other garbage. |
|
|
|
So does the bcash arguing mean that we're over the whole "bitcoin is going down!" talk and now we're fighting over which coin is going to be the new world currency?
Seriously does no one else see the repeating pattern of the trolls showing up and stirring up fresh new drama and FUD, right before Bitcoin is about to rise again? This has happened SOOOO many times now.  |
|
|
|
But a troll account from 2010 wouldn't know that, right?   Do you really think I'm a troll? If you're not then why are you appearing to troll? I presumed that you've had plenty of years to do research. We've been talking about the fallacy of the % dominance factor on CMC for a few years now. It's become completely meaningless. Just add new shitcoins to the list, give 'em a bogus market cap, and Bitcoin's % dominance automatically decreases. The more shitcoins get added to the list, the more Bitcoin's % dominance falls. Good point. It would be interesting to see a dominance figure based on actual order book sizes.
Because it would reveal the truth is precisely why you never will see that. |
|
|
|
Market cap of scam coins is illusory.
I posted earlier about how United Bitcoin had a daily volume of $450k on Quione with an order book depth of $560. That’s not a typo - the total order book depth was less than $1k.
But a troll account from 2010 wouldn't know that, right? |
|
|
|
The 'way Bitcoin is supposed to work' is any manner that anyone might try and succeed in making it work. Due precisely to its permissionless nature.
You're literally describing and making the case for Bitcoin development as it has been going since day 1. Amazing that anyone here at all might take you for someone clever. |
|
|
|
I could be glib and point out the 'cash' in the title. But I don't have to. Back before the tx volume got big enough to be chronically delayed to the 'next' block, zero conf txs were routine.
There is really no arguing this point. They worked. To the point that freeking _payment_processors_ accepted zero conf txs.
Here's a website that tracks 0-conf double-spend attempts on BCH: https://doublespend.cash/It is very rare for the transaction broadcast second to be confirmed in a block, even when it offers a higher fee. And 0-conf can be improved further, for example with double-spend relaying so that merchants can quickly detect fraud attempts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAt6B7b4GeMOr by more finely-grained proof-of-work to discourage miners from facilitating fraud: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXFuNkaYcPQWhat part of "Fuck off BCash was shit then and it's still shit now" don't you trolls understand? It doesn't matter what so called 'modifications' or 'improvements' are made to it, it is still a shitcoin. No one wants it. No wants to hodl it. It has no future. No one here cares. |
|
|
|
WTAF? They've lost their marbles, and the justification is complete nonsense. "It's so valuable that we burn it!" Also I'm guessing the supposed black hole address in question is of the "no-really-trust-us-we-don't-have-the-private-key" variety? |
|
|
|
The Great BCash scam: 1. Unlimited block size: check 2. Centralized mining: check 3. 0-conf so verification is nill: check 4 Removal of the 21M cap: soon! 5. Paper derivative backed by BCash: soon! |
|
|
|
There is no way to know when a transaction was issued. All a big miner can know is when he first saw it and he could share it with all of the other big miners. Then someone who is being paid could reach out to the big miners and ask if they have yet witnessed any conflicting transactions. If the answer is no and the receiver is aware of the miners policy of accepting the first transaction that they encounter in the event of conflicts, the receiver could then relatively reliably trust a 0 confirmation transaction. A degree of centralization in mining would help with this.
No worries, BCash has got you covered. They're all one big ol' centralized mining operation that trusts one another. No verification needed. So how long until they become PayPal 2.0? Sounds like they're already there. I think I just heard the sound of Satoshi screaming in his grave. |
|
|
|
Still thinking this is complete nonsense but ... https://bircoin.top/We are 3% ahead of the prediction The reason it's nonsense is because the amount of bitcoin holders who still hold hundreds and thousands of bitcoins vastly outweigh (in coins) the number of new users that could push the price to $1M by buying what little amount of bitcoin is on the exchanges. And the float is only getting thinner each year. I mean, there were n00bs still able to buy whole bitcoins just last year. Who wouldn't sell them all at $1M in just 3 years? Who wouldn't dump a few, or ten, or a hundred at that price point? Many would. Point is, because of the increasing selling impetus as the price climbs higher, I think it'll take a LOT longer for us to reach $1M/btc. Probably like 10-15 years. Extremely doubtful in just three years. Unless ETFs come on board and wanna just leverage up the price to the moon overnight, but they have to know this will spark some heavy selling. |
|
|
|
|
BCash is garbage and always will be. Run far away.
|
|
|
|
So at this point, it seems like a retest below the $6500 level would be extremely difficult to pull off. You can see that this is price point where the whales first came in hot and heavy pumping the market back in Nov. I believe we go sideways from here for a while.  |
|
|
|
You pretend that there is no brand hijacking going on. You cannot possibly be so naive to genuinely believe that on the evidence so you must be a fraud like all the others.
jbreher's not naive about the brand hijacking, he just doesn't give a shit. And he's in hella denial about BCash's chances of being successful in the future. For everyone one person that buys some BCash, there's a million buying Bitcoin. And that ratio will only get worse for BCash in the future. Do the fucking math, jbreher. |
|
|
|
Polish Bitcoiners protesting against the 1000% tax plan from their goverment on Bitcoin. 1000%... We don't recognize Bitcoin as a currency. Or a legitimate asset. We didn't create it. It's fucking digital tulips and has no value. We didn't even say you were allowed have it or own it. But since we can't stop you from buying it, we will tax it 1000%. We have zero right to do this, but we're going to do it anyway. Fuck. All. Governments. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
