Them poor poor bears  |
|
|
|
A scamming scumbag. Roger emailed Bity threatening to remove them from their website (bitcoin.com) if they don't start offering Bcash. Bity response; no one uses Bcash in Switzerland... Gets a few hundred million and turns into an egomaniac. He may be a big fish in this pond but the dude is a guppy on the global game of thrones. He doesn't seem to have any idea just how small he is compared to people with, not just wealth, but wealth that comes as a byproduct of real power. If he did, he wouldn't act like such an arrogant asshole all the time. I wish he would just fall into the ocean or something so I would never have to see his smug face again. *edit* I know it's stupid. I should say something more substantive. But the way he speaks and acts bugs me more than any other human being alive. That perfect mix of autism and narcissism is like a cheese grater on my senses.  /rantoff The players are known, the cards have been dealt and he doubled down. So at this point he has no option but to play out his hand i.e. continue doing what he's doing. The crappy part is bcash's funding (life support?) comes from Ver's BTC reserves and Bitmain. Unfortunately both benefit when BTC goes up, so unless BTC crashes hard or trades sideways for a very long time, the funding to prop bcash will continue to pour in. |
|
|
|
Can't we all just get along? Or at least take it to IRC?
<Donut[AFK]> HEY EURAKARTE
<Donut[AFK]> INSULT
<Eurakarte> RETORT
<Donut[AFK]> COUNTER-RETORT
<Eurakarte> QUESTIONING OF SEXUAL PREFERENCE
<Donut[AFK]> SUGGESTION TO SHUT THE FUCK UP
<Eurakarte> NOTATION THAT YOU CREATE A VACUUM
<Donut[AFK]> RIPOSTE
<Donut[AFK]> ADDON RIPOSTE
<Eurakarte> COUNTER-RIPOSTE
<Donut[AFK]> COUNTER-COUNTER RIPOSTE
<Eurakarte> NONSENSICAL STATEMENT INVOLVING PLANKTON
<Miles_Prower> RESPONSE TO RANDOM STATEMENT AND THREAT TO BAN OPPOSING SIDES
<Eurakarte> WORDS OF PRAISE FOR FISHFOOD
<Miles_Prower> ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND ACCEPTENCE OF TERMS
Bring out the regulation and control to shut them the f#$k up     Imagine if it was a group colluding to do this to someone who is protecting children that would be disgusting would it not Future proves past So how did it go everyone does Future prove past Still under $20k so no lambos yet |
|
|
|
|
Well hello there $7700 hope you're not planning on sticking around for a while
|
|
|
|
This is... interesting. Updated once a day I guess. https://tittyticker.com/Human female udders clad in brassieres, displaying a daily price. How revolting. Should be bottoms when the price is falling. Give this man a medal! |
|
|
|
And if that each person wanted to make just 32 transactions to different people bcash would need 30yrs to process that. Think about that!
I have thought about that. Today, that is indeed the case. Or even maybe longer - as 32MB is the currently supported max, which is subject to miners' decisions to create blocks smaller than max. Which is, of course, why there has been discussion within the BCH development community -- for as long as there has been a BCH -- on other orthogonal approaches to scaling. So while true today, it will be false for some value of 'tomorrow'. In the meantime, BCH is not suiciding itself for the sake of some illusory benefit of 'decentralization' along some axis that is entirely irrelevant. Orthogonal? Yes. Do you understand the term? In this case, meaning scaling in a manner unrelated to the max block size. You mean like side chains!
Sidechainy things are within the universe of things being discussed, though certainly not exclusively, nor even leadingly. WTF that wasn't in Satoshi's white paper!!!
Point? Wait so you're saying that different solutions might come in the future so time and resources are better spent on near term issues
In a manner of speaking, yes. Time tested engineering principles focus on the bang-for-the-buck solutions. Always. However, it is not 'might come'. We know of several scaling solutions orthogonal to increasing the max block size. The discussions underway are focused upon cost/benefit analysis. Or alternately risk/benefit analysis. You know - the essence of engineering. Reread that ^ few times, and then read your initial troll post about it taking 30yrs to transfer BTC to every human on earth. And then try really really REALLY hard to continue to troll as if you don't see the parallels |
|
|
|
And if that each person wanted to make just 32 transactions to different people bcash would need 30yrs to process that. Think about that!
I have thought about that. Today, that is indeed the case. Or even maybe longer - as 32MB is the currently supported max, which is subject to miners' decisions to create blocks smaller than max. Which is, of course, why there has been discussion within the BCH development community -- for as long as there has been a BCH -- on other orthogonal approaches to scaling. So while true today, it will be false for some value of 'tomorrow'. In the meantime, BCH is not suiciding itself for the sake of some illusory benefit of 'decentralization' along some axis that is entirely irrelevant. Orthogonal? You mean like side chains! WTF that wasn't in Satoshi's white paper!!! Wait so you're saying that different solutions might come in the future so time and resources are better spent on near term issues rather than arbitrary usages cases for the whole population! You're so cute with your flawed logic, i bet your tears will taste sweet |
|
|
|
Looking forward to some quality Schnorr FUD from Jbear and crew.
I don't know why you'd think that. I don't believe I have previously espoused an opinion on Schnorr sigs. You basically said Schnorr signatures would do nothing to alleviate the scaling issue. That would qualify as an opinion. Hmm. I guess you know more about my past postings than do I. Link? Schnorr can obviously reduce the size of txs that have multiple elements. I wouldn't say that is 'nothing'. If this be shown to be a reversal of a previously held opinion, then so be it. Of course, my final opinion would be driven by an analysis of not merely the benefits of Schnorr, but also its costs. edit: Oh - I see you've added the link. Thank you. I shall quote: Currently it would take over 30 years to send each person on earth a single Bitcoin transaction. Think about that.
Lightning does nothing to alleviate that.
Segwit does nothing to alleviate that.
Schnorr sigs does nothing to alleviate that. True enough. If you wish to send every person on earth a single Bitcoin tx (e.g., perhaps to open an LN channel), it will take on the order of three decades. And Schnorr indeed does nothing to alleviate that. It is a true statement, and it is not identical to "Schnorr signatures would do nothing to alleviate the scaling issue". Your assertion is shown to be false. And if that each person wanted to make just 32 transactions to different people bcash would need 30yrs to process that. Think about that! |
|
|
|
|
Is faketoshi going full billionaire at the mem pool?
|
|
|
|
Ohh finally the supply is coming from longs deleveraging! Finex longs are down by 100mil in 1hr, won't be long now  |
|
|
|
So even if you have some skepticism of segwit, it might be prudent of you to support the actual (rather than hypothetical) direction of bitcoin by storing a portion of your coins on segwit, even if, you decide to follow through and store the vast majority in legacy addresses
All right, I'll bite... What about storing some value on a segwit address is prudent? Wait you're seriously one of those that are willing to pay higher transaction fees because you fear that segwit will be unraveled? I mean 30% of all of the transaction have been segwit for quiet some time now, i'm willing to bet that vast majority of coins touched segwit at some point in their life. Like it or hate it segwit is here to stay and you have to be next level delusional still trying to preach spend by any mantra |
|
|
|
Just realized that Bitcoin's hash rate is up +100% since January 2018 and around +25% since May as well as +15% from two weeks ago.  That's a nice hashrate miners. Those are some nice ASICs. It would be shame if someone... changed... the algorithm. It's not going to happen, so I don't know what your point is except to bring up something that is not going to happen? not to be an ass...but actual question...I read someplace a month ago, actually the claim that miners need about $6,600 usd to make profit mining ..this was for the majority of big BTC miner halls...IF, the price dumps (see LTC) and there is an overabundance of ASIC miners (see LTC) is it not possible that it could get so bad or centralized (see LTC Bitmain) that perhaps this could be the case? I used LTC as an example ..which is not exactly fair, in that they have many pow-scrypt coins effected in this manner, not just Bitcoin forks....but there has to reach a point in price vs mining...where it could be you just could NOT mine coin at a price without having to change algo? anyway, probably not explained right, but you get the direction...what would it take to change algo on BTC? (if any) The miner's break even price point speculation is as accurate as top/bottom calling. No one knows and it's different for each miner. As far as algo change, that's a nuclear option, and like the real nuclear weapon just having it is enough of a deterrent. That option was floated when Bitmain got too ballsy and tried to corner the market with their asicboost. Community responded with UASF and segwit to level the playing field. That worked to a degree, Bitmain went to spin off bcash, and we didn't have to use the algo change. Long term, Moore's law will hit and the playing field will level out. Until then it'll be a bumpy ride, but should get smoother with everyday. As far as being forced to do it, that's very unlikely for BTC. That's how they used to kill shitty alts, throw a ton of hash power at an alt, wait for difficulty adjustment and then drop off, reducing the hash+increasing difficulty resulted in increased time between blocks to the point where alt was unusable, and rest of the network would have to mine at a loss until next difficulty adjustment. The insane hashrate of BTC makes it very unlikely and cost prohibitive. Plus this move would be offset by the market increasing their transaction fees which would make mining more lucrative again. |
|
|
|
I'm not following the whole USDT drama, to me it's just like another alt/shitcoin, i.e. if anything, people would try to escape into BTC when it crashes. Of course it can take down some exchanges, but if you keep your BTC on exchanges thats the risk that you're taking
It may be unfashionable to think it, but I don't really believe there is one any more. Even if at one point it was money out of thin air, and there's no proof either way, they've likely earned it back now. It's going to be a forever mystery I reckon that's rolled out every now and then for a quick scare. Again, so if someone created some airTokens and managed to find someone else to sell their BTC for these tokens, i fail to see how crashing airTokens would effect anyone besides the airToken bag holders (not counting indirect effects of failing exchanges and overall negative publicity from people not capable of differentiating between airtokens and BTC) |
|
|
|
I'm not following the whole USDT drama, to me it's just like another alt/shitcoin, i.e. if anything, people would try to escape into BTC when it crashes. Of course it can take down some exchanges, but if you keep your BTC on exchanges thats the risk that you're taking |
|
|
|
Hi I’m new here . Who the fuck is this roach geezer . What a complete asshole. Why does everyone put up with his shit?
Edit:weeeee
our legendary troll. did you just create new account for asking this here? or are you him? Yes a new account . No I’m not him . I’m also known as bitcoinpsycho There's an ignore button next to his/her name that's been clicked more times than google.com and also on anyone that quotes him/her |
|
|
|
BTC Dominance: 40 Can we get a new poll, at which price point will the miners run out of spare funds to support bcash? |
|
|
|
Finex leveraged longs are still at $700MM i wanna see them under $500MM. Can we absorb $200MM sell off? |
|
|
|
Finally some way overdue competition. Bitmain's monopoly coming to an end and hopefully so is the funding for their bcash side project. |
|
|
|
Ok, which one of you ordered the large green dildo ?
I'll have two or three on weekly chart, please Well this is refreshing |
|
|
|
Uh, realdoll.com has been around for over a decade. Not my cup of tea, and there's plenty of copies now. Don't forget the repair kit. I'd hate to be the guy providing on site support for this. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
