the very new SW protocol + moar complex road map (LN, 2nd Layer shit, nothing tested and ready soon)
or
BCH (= 8 y tested + little change to allow 8MB, but slow starting with <1MB in real = absolute ok, road map 32MB ... or 1GB ) ?
Or even
ETH, very young, not really scarce, Turing complete attack surface, scaling issues ^2 ...
you are just attacking SegWit and all that comes with it while hiding all the flaws in the other two which you mentioned here! which makes you comments here very biased and without any value. lets see. nothing about BCH is tested, the "8 y test" is the 1 MB blocks test not the 8 MB so that is the same. the flaws that will cause is that it makes running full nodes harder and harder by individuals in the long run if blocks become full not like so far with empty 100-200 kB blocks! and that leads to more centralization and eventually there can only be centralized master full nodes run by government agents instead of individuals all around the world and that kills bitcoin. ETH is even worse! you can no longer start a full node, the sync is impossible at this point because how slow and HUGE the blockchain of it is. a simple surge of transactions can cripple the whole ETH network which will cripple not only ETH but also all the tokens that are based on it! and worst but not last is the fact that ETH is centralized and ever since their roll back they proved it is not immutable either. My 'bias' is just 'against' complexity here. And technically, a no-SW Bitcoin Blockchain is tested for good over 8 years now. BCH is practically running < 1MB atm so what is your point? Sure - if big corps & masses decide this is less risky - so we are happy to see more here - that's how it works in growth phases - enough nodes will come with new players. The 'everybody needs to run a full node' narrative just does not hold any more - we just need 'enough' - PoW and it's inherent external risks are pretty good aligned with decentralization pressure. I very much hopefully wish that Bitcoin Cash blocks become regularly full that its lone developer's only option is to increase the blocks once again via another hard fork that would risk another chain split. Yes I said "lone" developer because there's really only one. Hahaha. Plus what do you mean by "enough nodes". Most of them are run by Roger Ver and Jihan Wu using Alibaba cloud services. Meanwhile Bitcoin has the smartest people working on it. But we are off the topic now. Back to Cobra. Well, yes - let's do (anti-bitcoin style!) and concentrate on a single / central individual ( Cobra in this case) .. to betters split and bash ? no - that's not good - and luckily there is more behind Bitcoin than some (only to you?) known 'lone' - these are damned to fail / die anyway ( try to understand anti - fragile) . you are free to believe what you want - If things go for Satoshi's Bitcoin - I'm with you. Bitcoin (Cash) has lots of perspectives - removing the max_block_size parameter from the consensus protocol level might be just the lowest hanging fruit here. |
|
|
|
the very new SW protocol + moar complex road map (LN, 2nd Layer shit, nothing tested and ready soon)
or
BCH (= 8 y tested + little change to allow 8MB, but slow starting with <1MB in real = absolute ok, road map 32MB ... or 1GB ) ?
Or even
ETH, very young, not really scarce, Turing complete attack surface, scaling issues ^2 ...
you are just attacking SegWit and all that comes with it while hiding all the flaws in the other two which you mentioned here! which makes you comments here very biased and without any value. lets see. nothing about BCH is tested, the "8 y test" is the 1 MB blocks test not the 8 MB so that is the same. the flaws that will cause is that it makes running full nodes harder and harder by individuals in the long run if blocks become full not like so far with empty 100-200 kB blocks! and that leads to more centralization and eventually there can only be centralized master full nodes run by government agents instead of individuals all around the world and that kills bitcoin. ETH is even worse! you can no longer start a full node, the sync is impossible at this point because how slow and HUGE the blockchain of it is. a simple surge of transactions can cripple the whole ETH network which will cripple not only ETH but also all the tokens that are based on it! and worst but not last is the fact that ETH is centralized and ever since their roll back they proved it is not immutable either. My 'bias' is just 'against' complexity here. And technically, a no-SW Bitcoin Blockchain is tested for good over 8 years now. BCH is practically running < 1MB atm so what is your point? Sure - if big corps & masses decide this is less risky - so we are happy to see more here - that's how it works in growth phases - enough nodes will come with new players. The 'everybody needs to run a full node' narrative just does not hold any more - we just need 'enough' - PoW and it's inherent external risks are pretty good aligned with decentralization pressure. |
|
|
|
Roger really needs to pump Bcash.
his shitcoin is dying slowly
BTC : real fork BCH : real cash Yeah, BCH is just the shift of the ceiling as Satoshi suggested BTC is now some Softsegregatedwitnessforkneedslighteningandothersecondlayershittoscalebutisnotb itcoinanymore |
|
|
|
What fixed the transaction backlog btw, did the major exchanges go segwit?
Some seem to think that they slapped the bogeyman Coinbase into shape -- they are now batching the outputs for multiple parties into single transactions. Segwit tx's in general count for some small portion. OTOH, the majority could be a simple reduction in demand. They slapped so many already so that not many are left to be slapped, after bears the snakes are targets... |
|
|
|
bitmain wants to make bitcoin cash more wide and popular among people than bitcoin.
the only time you should worry about bitcoin cash getting more wide spread, is not about twitter accounts or website links.. but when real world merchants stop accepting bitcoin and choose a different crypto. And exactly this is happening. SW + LN + < 1MB is too complex and too expensive to get any new merchants on board - this was pretty much clear front up. This looks so much Netscape + Altavista + Kodak, too much name calling and too much central egos.... The Lightning Network is not being marketed as a solution for merchants yet, while Segwit is now fully impelemented starting in version 0.16.0. Please explain to me how Segwit is "expensive and too complex for any new merchants". SW is a very big code base change and this even to the base protocol level, injected into a about 8 year old very experimental and totally new, mostly unproven and incomprehended complex open tech env. What would you expect, if you as a major or medium sized business are going to consult to professional risk managers (EY, Deloitte, PWC, ... Moodys, Standard & Poors, Fitch,.. insurance companies,... you name it) to let them figure out about whether it is more risky to choose for a robust, sustainable impl for years (consider maintenance, road map, gov shit,..) between the very new SW protocol + moar complex road map (LN, 2nd Layer shit, nothing tested and ready soon) or BCH (= 8 y tested + little change to allow 8MB, but slow starting with <1MB in real = absolute ok, road map 32MB ... or 1GB ) ? Or even ETH, very young, not really scarce, Turing complete attack surface, scaling issues ^2 ... If you really are going to consult with "professional risk managers" like those you mentioned, I believe using anything deeply technical to asses risk would go over all of their heads. Well - no. Look e.g. into Switzerland where lots of such companies / universities / FINMA are already up to date and also hire ppl for exclusively such tasks. Also some banks like Falcon, Frick, Swissquote, Vontoble are full running business here- be assured they have gone through many of such processes here. Look out of your box - bitcoin & co has reached much more brains you might see and ever are aware of. Proper risk management is base task in fin industry - many things are turned out into very clear numbers and math. Single ppl , as you might want to hear , have no exclusive say any more if it comes to this rigorous quant analysis. Code / Protocol analysis for beginners: Compare Line-Count (simplest measure for code complexity) - to - feature / capacity achieved High code complexity is mostly bad as every junior coder knows.  (If there is simpler code out doing exactly the same or better than the more complex one, what code would you start with?) Help: Google for it risk manager "blockchain" |
|
|
|
bitmain wants to make bitcoin cash more wide and popular among people than bitcoin.
the only time you should worry about bitcoin cash getting more wide spread, is not about twitter accounts or website links.. but when real world merchants stop accepting bitcoin and choose a different crypto. And exactly this is happening. SW + LN + < 1MB is too complex and too expensive to get any new merchants on board - this was pretty much clear front up. This looks so much Netscape + Altavista + Kodak, too much name calling and too much central egos.... The Lightning Network is not being marketed as a solution for merchants yet, while Segwit is now fully impelemented starting in version 0.16.0. Please explain to me how Segwit is "expensive and too complex for any new merchants". SW is a very big code base change and this even to the base protocol level, injected into a about 8 year old very experimental and totally new, mostly unproven and incomprehended complex open tech env. What would you expect, if you as a major or medium sized business are going to consult to professional risk managers (EY, Deloitte, PWC, ... Moodys, Standard & Poors, Fitch,.. insurance companies,... you name it) to let them figure out about whether it is more risky to choose for a robust, sustainable impl for years (consider maintenance, road map, gov shit,..) between the very new SW protocol + moar complex road map (LN, 2nd Layer shit, nothing tested and ready soon) or BCH (= 8 y tested + little change to allow 8MB, but slow starting with <1MB in real = absolute ok, road map 32MB ... or 1GB ) ? Or even ETH, very young, not really scarce, Turing complete attack surface, scaling issues ^2 ... |
|
|
|
From thread start BTC proponents in denial on on-chain scaling yet BCH is going to 32MB blocks. Total censorship on r/bitcoin subreddit. Now they are attacking BitPay for simple doing business with BCH.
Even if you are not fan of BCH you should understand how BTC community attacking those who disagrees with them and why BCH forked away.
10 years ago I wouldn't believe if someone told me that we'd have home PCs with TerraByte HDDs and 1Gbit/s Internet connectivity (well, last mile) but now here we are.
Edit. Even though I joined not so long ago I feel sad when I read how original BTC developers/community were pushed away.
One reasen for this we can see also in our 'democratic' governments. We feel very save and allow / build / enrich these governments with more and more power in good times, not thinking about bad times or bad people getting into control ( like Trump now sitting in front of the biggest Atombomb button). So exactly this happend to core. The design of the government in BTC was and is not really decentralized as it should be, at least if it comes to critical base protocol decisions. The noise of a very few dev people 'in control' and with biggest fiat stakes behind and the combi of censorship decided this for their own interests. Now with the two bigger forks (1MB+SW and 8M-SW) we gained kinda decentralized gov and markets can decide what way to go. This is all in experimental phase. Industrial Scaling has not really happened in all Bitcoin sections, but mining section was quickest here. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin Cash payments have just been rolled out to ALL BitPay merchants! what do you think about? Is this good information?
Yes. One more stone being laid in the foundation of Bitcoin Cash. Bullish. I heard bit coin cash was created and funded by the bankers as a way to take bitcoin off the throne, so they can manipulate the market more. they can only manipulate bitcoin oh so much compared to this bit coin cash, bit coin cash is the bankers bitcoin I think its true because coinbase is banker owned and they helped pump bitcoin cash they are now getting sued, and yes you do owe the pumped up bit coin cash price due to market manipluation at coinbase you know the same coinbase that locked the market when bitcoin crashed and the prevented people from buying in cheap or cut their loses.... how quickly we forget dont we? https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/cryptocurrency/lawsuit-filed-against-cryptocurrency-exchange-coinbase-over-bch-insider-trading-2522923.htmlThe largest cryptocurrency exchange in the US has been hit by a class action lawsuit over alleged insider trading during the launch of Bitcoin Cash(BCH) on its platforms. The lawsuit filed with the US district court for the northern district of California on March 1 alleges that Coinbase customers lost millions as the exchange tipped off its employees and a few customers about the impending launch of bitcoin cash trading before the formal announcement. This allowed them to trade bitcoin cash earlier resulting in a sudden spike in its price, it further says. Bankers will not like Bitcoin Cash as it is more difficult to be centralized as the block size is bigger and people can use the network more directly. Actually a larger blocksize naturally makes it more centralised because full nodes become much more expensive to run so if the network does become big enough then only larger corporations and banks will be able to afford to run full nodes this puts the power in their hands How does running a full node put more power in your hands? I run several full nodes, and I don't feel very powerful. In a POW coin the miners have to run full nodes, but I don't see the advantage of Joe average running one. Does it really help secure the network? Absolutely correct, and the help is too few to even be noticed. Only big players with some decent skin in the game will run full nodes, also because they will do proper risk management. If some idiots try to derail average Joe to spend their little money to hardware companies, they are against Bitcoin and only troll up. Next to miners also some bigger corps like exchanges and stores might want to ensure their client's TX are really broadcasted and are getting mined for their interest. Average Joes are happy and will profit from all that without any hardware costs (these are shared since mearchants will include these in their consumer pricing). |
|
|
|
(a) BTC als Zahlungsmittel ist tatsächlich ungeeignet
(b) BTC war niemals Anonym
(c) BTC ist schon seit mindestens 2 Jahren zentralisiert
"B!"Ach, das war kein Quiz, welche der obigen Aussagen stimmt? Die Aussagen a und b könnten falscher kaum sein. Zu A: Warum ist die Aussage falsch, wenn ehemalige Akzeptanten den BTC aus den Programm nehmen? Zu C: 3 Miner teilen sich das Feld auf 52,3 % auf die da wären: - BTC.com = 25,9 % - Ant Pool = 15,2 % - VIA BTC = 11,2% = 52,3 % Was ist daran dezentral? Sorry die 54 % von oben weichen um 1,7 % ab.  https://blockchain.info/de/poolsWenn wir noch Slushpool dazu nehmen, sind wir bei 62%...vier Hauptakteure nennst du dezentral? BTC Top und wir sind bei 70,7% F2Pool dazu? 76,4 %...wir sind nun bei 6 Akteuren...dezentral? Wenn man nur auf pools sieht, dann wirkt es schon 'zentral', aber es sind doch wohl rech viele Einzelne dahinter, die auch pools hoppen nach umterschiedlichen gusti. Abers selbst die 'paar' pools sind doch recht dezentral, wenn man das mit der üblichen uns bekannent internetnahen Geschäften vergleicht, wie Amazon, Google, ebay,.... Oder aber mit den anderen Wirtschaftsriesen wie Daimler, VW, Toyota.... Lustig ist noch der Einwand mit der Streiterei hier und der VW bulli hierbei. Ja, es ist sogar meist noch schlimmer hier, denn hier streitet man oft schon los, weil der eine Bulli ne 1 Liter Maschine hat, der andere schon 8 Liter. |
|
|
|
|
^. You cannot help those core trolls. Cannot fix em.
It will be much moar decentralized by being spread out to any mearchant any bigger business any bigger bank and exchange, who can afford running bigger nodes and keeping smaller parties in the game and service.
Core trolls are still sitting in a small alchemy lab and having no clue about industrial scaling.
Having no education and big thinking capabilities they still fall back in childish behavior, which is poor trolling in dumbest form.
Nice to see you here proving it all day.
|
|
|
|
|
The store of value is mostly backed by the rich infrastucture and monstrous investments of the mining industry, securing value and protocol validity (scarcity, ownership, ...) also in a variation of a Nash Equilibrium.
No other coin might ever can get this high PoW backed security = value.
Thing is also proper usage and wide spread acceptance to make it a world wide trustless exchange (e.g. Payment) system base layer. SW + LN might slow this down and have some security issues...
|
|
|
|
Actually PayPals new patent heads into this direction. Once they own / store a big bunch of priv keys in their central DBs, I m very sure you ll see hackers ask and sell exactly what OP does here.. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin Cash payments have just been rolled out to ALL BitPay merchants! what do you think about? Is this good information?
BULLISH - NEWEGG! Mining supplies - ding! https://www.trustnodes.com/2018/03/09/newegg-namecheap-100000-merchants-start-accepting-bitcoin-cashMeanwhile Kore minions are all in a huff about Cobra changing the POW, or whatever other stupid little drama of the day. Their ship has sailed. Blockstream is done. Greg is trolling again but at least he's contained in his mom's basement. In kore it is all about lightening fast segregations - we are all witnesses ( trolls wanna prune this ). If you search for a nearly 10 years open, stable running and acceptance gaining blockchain project, thus can be only BCH. Fear proven Troll escort proves this very nicely. |
|
|
|
bitmain wants to make bitcoin cash more wide and popular among people than bitcoin.
the only time you should worry about bitcoin cash getting more wide spread, is not about twitter accounts or website links.. but when real world merchants stop accepting bitcoin and choose a different crypto. And exactly this is happening. SW + LN + < 1MB is too complex and too expensive to get any new merchants on board - this was pretty much clear front up. This looks so much Netscape + Altavista + Kodak, too much name calling and too much central egos.... |
|
|
|
Bitpay is fully usable with BCH now  LoL |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
