This situation would be entirely different from the other forks. There was no theft when bitcoin cash, gold, etc, were forked. In the case of theft, it would be similar to what happened to ethereum.

When the DAO hack happened, ethereum forked from the main chain, to reverse the hack, and the main chain (at that point) became "ethereum classic". Eventually ethereum became the main chain, gaining more value than the classic version.

In a market perspective, the consequences of such stealing of Segwit outputs would be like what happened to the ethereum blockchain. Ethereum forked after the DAO hack, rolling back and thus, having the shortest blockchain at that point. The original one (that is, the one retaining the original chain after the DAO hack) was hence called "ethereum classic". However, both investors and miners flocked to the forked chain, and it gained more hashrate, surpassing the classic chain both in value and power. It also retained its original name.

So, what would happen, in a market perspective, is that both chains would start with the same value, but the one forked by Core (technically, Core would have to rollback, to reverse the stealing of Segwit outputs, thus forking like ethereum did) would receive more value, even if dont go straight to a PoS model at first.

We need to weigh down human behaviour on this event. Investors dont have a clue about immutability in the protocol, they dont even know how the protocol works, so they would mistrust the miners, and in such a way that it would put the PoW model into question. It could even affect the altcoin market, with several coins switching to a PoS model. Notice that, right now, ethereum is going to a hybrid between PoS and PoW, and this give a clue of what would happen to bitcoin in case of this attack.

The PoS model would also attract institutional money. Banks gained power through stacking in the debt-based fiat system. They dont like bitcoin because they dont have more power than the miners over it. The miners would lose their power if they steal the Segwit outputs, and ultimately, the theft would be reversed, like it happened with ethereum. So, I believe this wont happen at all, unless the miners want to consciously end their business. If the electrical companies benefit from mining, I dont see why this should happen.

But in case it happens, it would be better to have most of your output in legacy addresses, as this would maximize the airdrop. People who only hold in Segwit adresses would not receive coins from the miners chain, as their coins would be the ones stolen on that chain.

Its interesting in the way that it could lead to a PoS version of bitcoin. If the miners betray the trust of users, and steal funds from Segwit adresses, the devs will fork it, rollback the theft, and use LN to validate blocks, since LN is dependable on Segwit. This would lead to a PoS version of bitcoin.

On the other hand, we would have the Legacy mainchain keeping the same value of the forked one, due to being the longest chain in a PoW perspective (LN came only in 2017), which was not the case with BCH (which had less hashrate when it forked).

But Im probably wrong, since I dont know all the technicals about it.

CSW keep doing threats not only against bitcoin, but against the entire cryptospace. So the general dislike for him is not that irrational as you believe.

In that standard bubble chart, it would be the "first sell off" and "bear trap" phase. I believe we are already on it, because it fell $1500 in just some days. Some bearwhales are in a hurry to be trapped. The "despair" phase from the previous bubble is already over, and we are back to the mean.

This message from Shelby is very interesting. The issue is even more complex than what I believe it was.

The recent versions of the core wallet are only distributing adresses starting with 3. Do anyone know if its possible to generate adresses starting with 1? Most of my stash is on those old "legacy" adresses, but I dont know if any fractions that I move from adresses starting with 3 to these old adresses would be valid (in face of what Shelby explained, assuming its true). Any suggestions?

Seems likely to happen earlier, as it fell $1500 by now. $5300 by the end of this month.

I didnt, I read somewhere he have it.

Exchanges should have some mechanism to suppress this kind of manipulation, like not having it go lower than 5% of the most recent price. But if only one exchange do this, it will go bankrupt, as the bot users would migrate to the others. They need to unite and place some rules over trading, because the manipulation is showing up and people might get tired of it, and its better to have a consortium putting some rules than some government.

You cant trust bitcoin as a store of value when it drops $800 in just one day, when the bear market had already ended and the price had a organic growth recently. Myself was only going to start selling when it reaches 30k (holding since 2015), now Im thinking about dropping some on 10k, because this last manipulation was very cheeky, the way it happened yesterday.

A long time ago I read that only NSA have the capabilities to break encryption on the level found in Truecrypt and Veracrypt. CSW is cooperating (and even flattering) the anglo governments for some reason, and I believe is to have help from NSA or a similar agency.

The volume where Satoshis coins are located its encrypted with Truecrypt, and the computers which CSW masked as a "mining operation" are trying to break it. They probably have a deadline which would be january 2020, when the decryption would end.

Then, he would dump one million BTC on the exchanges, for $1200 each, which would give him 1.2 billion dollars. This money he would use to pay for a 51% attack on the BTC chain. Since its illegal to dump high volumes without a notice, he is doing this notice right now, believing the decryption will succeed in january 2020. If not, he would use a second deadline by the middle of 2020, when the halving happens. Thats what I understand from his posts.

What could be done about it? Supposing he could get this money out from hundreds of exchanges (we are talking about 1.2 billion dollars) and would pay for this 51% attack, and then capture the network for himself, the best solution would be to do a hard fork, locking Satoshi addresses in the forked version as soon as CSW started moving the coins stored there. This should be done before these coins hit the exchanges, and the exchanges would need to change to the forked version too. In this way, the disaster could be prevented.

The devs would need to devise some backup plan for it, they cant just underestimate CSW and treat him like a clown, because we dont know who he might be working with for the decryption of Satoshi's wallet. I dont want to spread any FUD, just to be realistic. Also, this tale about Paul Le Roux could be an attempt to discredit bitcoin, in case the decryption fails by halving time. If Paul Le Roux was really Satoshi, they would have the password for the wallet already, as they could just torture him in prison. I dont believe this would work, as most people dont give a fuck who Satoshi was.

BSV have built-in code that allows governments to freeze and confiscate coins from anyone. I read this while researching about their project.

In this way, tyrannical governments can simply confiscate coins from its citizens to pay debts to international banks. Debts which they contract without asking their taxpayers about it. They can simply turn crypto illegal and confiscate the assets from the "criminals" which are holding it.

You dont live in the third world, you dont know what socialism looks like. Do you really think a coin that can be confiscated will serve as a good store of value? I do not. And I doubt such coin will free people from modern slavery. Most likely it will go in the opposite direction, as CW dont cease to show up, with his discourse about doing evil just for the sake of it.

I believe this is a bear trap. The whale dump such volumes so that people sell in panic. Then the whale buy it back with a 10% drop from the initial dump. Since most bears would be waiting a 30-50% drop, their shorts are squeezed.

The whale dont even have to take the money out of the exchange.

Not if the dumper was a governmental agency, or a bank. In this case they have it fully covered.

And if bitcoin drops $800 in a single day from a 25k BTC dump, I can only imagine what would happen if it was 1 million BTC.

Pure manipulation.

Depois do fiasco com a localbitcoins, estão aparecendo novas exchanges no formato P2P, o que é positivo para o ecossistema.

Uma que eu descobri hoje é a HodlHodl, que tem uma versão em português e não precisa de KYC para usar. Ela segue o mesmo formato da localbitcoins, mas não tem ninguém usando reais por lá. No meu caso, eu teria que fazer transferência via SEPA e Swift, onde as taxas bancárias são um estupro financeiro.

Estou divulgando por aqui para que vocês espalhem em suas redes sociais e assim possamos ver trades em reais por lá, já que ninguém quer usar o BISQ.

Governments cant control bitcoin, but they can control the exchanges. Users can be cucked hard, because the exchanges are centralized, and the only one which was not cut Iran from its services.

People should start using BISQ. I hope more solutions using proxies are implemented.

Que termo de pobre, que negócio mais anos 80. Estes golpistas não tem nenhuma criatividade.

R0ach is instilling FUD so that the price wont go up in a parabolic and crash afterwards.

Most of these millionaires move their money when the government close on them. They have offshore accounts, they can buy passports and change residence easily. It happened on France when the government increased taxes on the rich, there was even an actor who fled to Russia.

Will people use BISQ more if bitcoin turns illegal?

Or will they turn cuckold and sell their coins?

Nunca ouvi falar. Se apareceu na TV, então deve ser merda.