Your English is fine. It's your perception that needs work. With so many new participants streaming into the space, a rapid rise was inevitable. As is the correction. As will be the subsequent recovery and the next skyward burst.
Aren't you supposed to be a bear Of course I'm a bear. Doesn't exclude me from being a bull. Just stop it with the species-ism.  |
|
|
|
About 40 percent of bitcoin is held by perhaps 1,000 users
Got any data to go with your wild assertion? Not that I think you're _wrong_, mind you. I just think you're spouting nonsense. I bet you never questioned where you heard that 'statistic'. amirite? |
|
|
|
I'm not sure what's going on. Why isn't there more buying pressure? sub $8k seems very cheap to me
I think you'd be surprised how little money from retail investors was the cause of the actual rally during the month of Dec. The whale pump money probably outnumbered Average Joe money like 100:1. Which also means this isn't Average Joe panick selling, it is whale(s) shorting. Nobody in his right mind buyin something that has gone 20x for no reason at all , other than to play on very short term bounces sorry for broken english Your English is fine. It's your perception that needs work. With so many new participants streaming into the space, a rapid rise was inevitable. As is the correction. As will be the subsequent recovery and the next skyward burst. |
|
|
|
People always say they will buy if price drops but vast majority are too scared to buy when it does or think it will keep going lower.
Aye. 'Tis in these moments where the value of a trading system is manifested. |
|
|
|
Sold it all at $9940. Bitcoin is a fraud and if anyone working for me buys any they are fired.
Sarcasm or retard? That's Elwar's second 'sold it all' in the last several [hours | thousand $]. Figure it out. |
|
|
|
I make a bit on the side by buying and selling for people, taking a percentage with each trade.
You might want to either stop doing that, or stop talking about it. I suggest you look up the feds' definition of Money Services Business. Not a murican. But yes, still don't want the taxman catching on. Oops. My mistake. Indeed, I think you've mentioned this before. Apologies. In my defense, I meant well  |
|
|
|
NO ONE CARES ABOUT BEECASH ~ THE BEECASH NOOBS BANNED ME WITHIN 10 MINUTES :-D GET THE FUCK OUTTA HERE !!! LOLLLL
I have no idea what incident you are babbling about, nor what your supposed banning has to do with the topic at hand. Given your proclivity for tangential non-sequiturs, I'm not sure I care, either. weeee! |
|
|
|
I make a bit on the side by buying and selling for people, taking a percentage with each trade.
You might want to either stop doing that, or stop talking about it. I suggest you look up the feds' definition of Money Services Business. |
|
|
|
By the way, @ jbreher, to the extent that you were really employing $250 price increments in recent times, I hope that you have either stepped those back a bit on those increments (to make more large) or are otherwise keeping up with them. I would feel stressed to a fucking much higher level, if I were to have been employing $250 price increments in the past day or so and during other times like these.
Nope. Still at $250. I had some gap-filling to do when I got around to checking the trades today, but such is no problem. I don't see any reason to panic when taking my time opens such gaps. I do have a higher propensity for anxiety when we're streaming down, as opposed to streaming up. But then I just glance over at my growing piles of BTC & BCH, and console myself in the knowledge that we will again one day arise. Just today, I've pulled in 17 BTC on execution of pre-entered buy orders, and another 1.5 or so BTC on the volatility. When we again arise to mcgoosen's magic $25777, that'll be nearly a half-mill of fiat value. |
|
|
|
(snip) (snip)
It's the same concept at the basis of PoW: Working must be hard, checking must be easy. And stay easy.
So what is your point here? Do you assert that farmers in Africa are able to run a fully-validating, non-mining wallet client for BTC are fully able to, but are utterly unable to do so for BCH? Again! Simplifying things down to 1/0, "fully able"/"utterly unable" is quite below you. It's a matter of degrees. Come on. I am not a farmer and don't live in Africa, but running a "fully-validating, non-mining wallet client" is possible for me on the BTC chain, albeit not always comfortable bandwidth-wise. It would be nearly impossible for me to do the same on the BCH chain, if the miners would get their shit together and stick to the big blocks they loved so much, rather than jumping wildly from one size to the other. Today, the BCH chain is less resource intensive than is the BTC chain. Of course, I expect this will change with increasing use of BCH in commerce. Nevertheless, it has been shown that today's typical home computer on a typical home broadband connection can handle about 100 tx/s before bogging down - several times more than that with fixes to the broken multithreading model in today's core-derived clients. And 100 tx/s is well below the current 8MB BCH blocksize. Let's keep this discussion as it is for now and give it a few months, will we? LN is coming.
Which, I expect, will do very little to solve the congestion problem. But OK. (Hint: a "fully-validating, non-mining wallet client" is what the rest of the world calls a full node.)
Hint: when Satoshi said 'node', he was referring to a mining fully-validating client. Except for when he qualified it explicitly as non-mining. IOW, the coarsening of the language -- by people who should really know better -- has resulted in increased ambiguity. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin Cash is going down, why is everyone here doing like if everything was fine ?
why are you here? notmatrix,notjoker,notb,,,,are you buying BCH..or you want cheap BCH? I'm just trying to have concrete positive things about this one, but so far, only people bringing negative analysis have bring concrete stuff, while the defense team brings only stuff like " bch has great people following it, it's top tech, etc. " Here's some concrete BCH goodness. It used to require about 19 BCH to buy a single BTC. Now it takes about 6 BCH to buy a single BTC. You talk about the past when i'm asking concrete infos about the future, not belief You make no sense. The future is unwritten. What do you think there is that can be said about it that does not consist of forward-looking statements? What 'negative analysis' do you have to point to that is concrete, and about the future? |
|
|
|
Do you claim that every BTC user runs a fully-validating, non-mining wallet client (often erroneously referred to as a 'full node')? Do you claim that no BCH user runs a fully-validating, non-mining wallet client? If the answers respectively are not 'yes' and 'yes', then I fail to see what your point is. Neither is purely peer-to-peer, and neither is purely client-server.
Per your rationale, if BTC, say, has 20.000 nodes and BCH has 20 nodes, they are the same, in their neither being pure p2p or pure client/server... yet, if you aren't intellectually dishonest, you realize that there is a big quality difference. Of course jbreher's being intellectually rogueish. He's smart enough to know better. Smart enough to know that nobody of 'normal' means that truly wants to run a fully-validating, non-mining wallet client -- be it BTC or BCH -- is unable to do so. But but... farmers in Africa? But but... the democratic finance that Ver says he dreams of, while Bitcoin forgot it and it's only for the elites? It's the same concept at the basis of PoW: Working must be hard, checking must be easy. And stay easy. So what is your point here? Do you assert that farmers in Africa are able to run a fully-validating, non-mining wallet client for BTC are fully able to, but are utterly unable to do so for BCH? |
|
|
|
Do you claim that every BTC user runs a fully-validating, non-mining wallet client (often erroneously referred to as a 'full node')? Do you claim that no BCH user runs a fully-validating, non-mining wallet client? If the answers respectively are not 'yes' and 'yes', then I fail to see what your point is. Neither is purely peer-to-peer, and neither is purely client-server.
Per your rationale, if BTC, say, has 20.000 nodes and BCH has 20 nodes, they are the same, in their neither being pure p2p or pure client/server... yet, if you aren't intellectually dishonest, you realize that there is a big quality difference. Of course jbreher's being intellectually rogueish. He's smart enough to know better. Smart enough to know that nobody of 'normal' means that truly wants to run a fully-validating, non-mining wallet client -- be it BTC or BCH -- is unable to do so. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin Cash is going down, why is everyone here doing like if everything was fine ?
why are you here? notmatrix,notjoker,notb,,,,are you buying BCH..or you want cheap BCH? I'm just trying to have concrete positive things about this one, but so far, only people bringing negative analysis have bring concrete stuff, while the defense team brings only stuff like " bch has great people following it, it's top tech, etc. " Here's some concrete BCH goodness. It used to require about 19 BCH to buy a single BTC. Now it takes about 6 BCH to buy a single BTC. |
|
|
|
He makes some pretty bad points regarding the vision of Satoshi. He names some points about bch and then says "that's closer to Satoshi's vision". Yet the points he quotes are the exact opposite, except technological scaling. Well, no. Nowhere does he say "that's closer to Satoshi's vision". Perhaps you are referring to the following?: "more closely aligned to Satoshi’s original white paper"? For that is something he actually does say - perhaps the closest to what you erroneously claim he said. If we're going to have a meaningful dialogue, you're going to need to speak with precision. Why don't you answer this, then point out which particular numbered stated attributes you believe to be at odds with this claim? 1) What part of "peer-to-peer" didn't he grasp? You either have a client/server system, or a peer-to-peer, or a semi-centralized system with very few "peers" who are your servers, and thus aren't really "peers"... you are their client. How can a client/server system be closer to Satoshi's vision than a peer to peer system?
Do you claim that every BTC user runs a fully-validating, non-mining wallet client (often erroneously referred to as a 'full node')? Do you claim that no BCH user runs a fully-validating, non-mining wallet client? If the answers respectively are not 'yes' and 'yes', then I fail to see what your point is. Neither is purely peer-to-peer, and neither is purely client-server. 4) Without fees, mining profitability will fall of a cliff, not in 100+ years, but in 6 to 14 years from now. No miner will stay around to mine 0.0 to 0.1 btc per block until "coins are exhausted" in over a century ahead so that a fee market develops. That's bullshit. Without fees and a fee market, BCH is not futureproof. If you exist as a coin on the premise that users will always have ample space to transact, and that users can always have txs on with 1-2-5 sat/byte, at that point your store of value property is destroyed because
a) the network will be unsafe (no mining incentive)
or
b) you implement a tail-emission inflationary scheme to cover mining incentives by issuing more coins than the initial 21mn target.
The solution is so clear in its simplicity, it is truly stunning that you do not get it. _IF_ we were to reach a point where the fees were insufficient to incentivize any given miner to mine, then blocks will not be mined. This will create more demand for transaction processing. More demand & lees supply => prices rise to the point where block mining is incentivized. What price? The price of mining a transaction onto the blockchain. The price we call 'transaction fee'. |
|
|
|
Ummm... you realize that the project quoted in that tweet has nothing whatsoever to do with any of the leading implementations of Bitcoin Cash clients, right?
Meanwhile, a rather balanced compare & contrast. From Vinny Lingham, even. whowouldathunkit? https://vinnylingham.com/a-tale-of-two-bitcoins-20375d49d3d3 |
|
|
|
Bcash is for faggot ver loving homosexuals... A big FUCK you ver you retarded shit......
That's my man. Spot on bruh 'Tyler.Durden' and mindrust. Raising the level of discourse in the cryptospace since reaching puberty in 2017. Coming at you Live from a loveseat in Vegeta's Mom's basement.  |
|
|
|
ETH is not a shitcoin by any means.
With no defined emission schedule, ETH isn't even a coin.
Because the people who are screaming that fees are too high are 99.99% primarily day traders or brokers,
Makes no sense. Would not day traders and brokers have all their funds on exchange? If so, high fees are no concern of theirs.
Gay cowboy finally pulls trigger. It's harder than it seems.
I feel like there's a joke in there somewhere... I chortled... Incidentally... congrats Bob - long as you didn't shoot your whole wad. XD
(by the way, I still would have Tera the beara and jbreher the picnic food eater to talk with.... hahahahahahaha... )
Alas, 'tis true. I don't believe that I have any regular WO participant on ignore. And for whatever attractive attributes JJG may have, he certainly possesses the flaw of being an interminable WO participant. Of course, I kinda drift off mid-JJG-post from time to time... I don't give a ratt's ass.
Hmm. Ratt with two 't's'. Unrepentant '80's hair metal devotee?
maybe except for a full node on an ofline computer
 What most refer to as a 'full node' is a non-mining, fully-validating wallet. By definition, these must be online. Lest they be unable to validate. |
|
|
|
I think for the time being we shall limit our engagement to shitcoin exchanges and bashing TERA + r0ach
Don't forget about PeterR and jbreher. Yeah! Don't forget about... unnhh .... nevermind. you are a sport jbreher, I'll give you that Meh. It's merely cartoon violence. I'ze been a keyboard warrior since before the internet. I can take it. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
