Well a very good morning Bitcoinland.
I see I woke up just in time for a rally. It's moving so quickly there's almost no point in posting a price but it just hit $6017USD/$7709CAD at Bitcoinaverage.
AltCash is also up nicely at $456USD/$585CAD (Coinmaketcap). For those still holding both, that's a total of $6473USD or $8194CAD per old coin. Not bad.
Go Bitcoin go.
AltGodl is up too, currently $108 And for those that were smart enough to dump BCH coin for .16 of BTC you're already over $7k  |
|
|
|
Well that escalated quickly |
|
|
|
It looks to me like the idea of "seasteads" is to get together among rich people and not pay taxes to a state, but instead pay for everything (defense, law enforcement, etc.). So you'd end up with two classes of people, the rich, and the people who work for the rich.
Yes, because when everything is blockchain based, only the rich benefit. Better get rid of your bitcoin now because it's just something for rich people to not pay taxes. Only the rich can use a currency that the government doesn't distribute. It already costs over $5k, only a rich person can afford that. I guess I should tell the many socialists working on this that their expectations of helping the environment and having self sustaining design, closed loop food systems, renewable energy, recycling systems, a solution for refugees, coral development, etc. is just going to benefit the rich. A seastead will be a tiny speck on an ocean that is twice the size of all the countries in the world combined. Yet people will still be pissed off if there are rich people out in middle of nowhere being free rich. The blockchain is not miraculous, it's a technology, it won't solve humankind's problems. And yes, greed is one of our problems. I don't pretend to be immune to it. I used to support communist ideals, but nowadays, I've become cynical, I don't see any way for such ideals to come about aside from being governed by some kind of benevolent AI. Giving up one childish fantasy in favor of another is not much of an improvement. Here is what is going to happen. A lot of people are going to die. After that, we may be able to build something better. But first people need to die. Anybody here wonder how long before Ibian opens fire on a crowd of innocents and Torque calls it a false flag?  lol There are some scary people here. I often wonder what roach is like in real life... It would be cool if we could somehow all post an anonymous self portrait and then have a game where we try to match the picture to the username by voting. Wouldn't be fun, swastika tattoo would give roach right away |
|
|
|
i'm going to laugh when 2mb blocks start printing :-D weeeee WTF how can i swap 1:1 BTC:SEG2x with Ver?? I guess he's already abandoning BCrASH? |
|
|
|
BTC Dominance: 57.3% |
|
|
|
Wtf still under $10k?? bah  |
|
|
|
Dimon is a fool & hasn’t got a clue about the path that bitcoin is taking. Anybody who reacts to comments by him is an idiot. I totally agree. What an ignorant comment. Not everyone has a $30 million annual salary that they can just "not care" about Bitcoin. Such arrogance in his uneducated opinion. My formerly smart daughter. why he keeps busting on his daughter? Not sure which one owns BTCs    They all made it to Introducing Wall Street's Hottest Offspring http://www.businessinsider.com/introducing-wall-streets-hottest-offspring-2010-2 |
|
|
|
BTC8k ask wall @ $5700 on Finex. The whale has returned 
|
|
|
|
.
As another user mentioned in this thread, it would take 30 years for each person on the planet to open and close a lightning channel. And although maybe bitcoin will never use it all, eventually 1MB will not cater.
In the interest of accuracy, 30 years for every human to make one on chain transaction. This could be opening a channel, or it could be closing a channel. If you want everyone to be able to both open and close a channel, you are looking at 60 years. Well, S2X could drop this down to 30. Go S2X! /s Why da faq would every user on earth need to open and close an LN channel? (When 3 lanes are taken) It would take 60yrs for every single car in the world to go through this one 4 lane highway, demolish it and rebuild it so it would handle every single car in this one spot  |
|
|
|
CoinJoin, JoinMarket, Shuffle-what-ever-thingies. ... taint is pretty much useless if someone knew to mix or premix bitcoins. Granted, it's not being done by "normal" people yet, only those in that irc chat room or something that do these transactions. But it will catch on.
We still don't have a usable technology to mix transactions that does not consume even more on-chain block space. Which is, of course, space we don't have on the 1MB4EVAH chain. #justsayin' Well this might come to a surprise to you (or you're well aware of this and just trolling ), but BTC was never meant to be fully anonymous. So yeah it you want to anonymize your coins you have to pay, or wait for sidechains, or if you can't wait use an alt. But, BTC doesn't make me breakfast for free!!! #btcfail |
|
|
|
WTF down to $5500  is BTC DEAD!?!? |
|
|
|
|
Are we at $10k yet? Bah, going back to sleep
|
|
|
|
|
If we can just go up to $6k and then btc2 can be worth $4k at split before it crashes, that'd be great. Mkkaaaaayy!?!?!
|
|
|
|
Nope. I don't like it. I can't properly celebrate when alt coiners suffer like this. They're degenerates, but they're our degenerates.
Also, because rotation.
Nah as someone else mentioned they need to find their use case, otherwise they'll find themselves redundant when side chains come in They're already redundant, but all of crypto has been trading as a kind of twisted index for a while now. Unless this really is the unpeggening, a bunch of this honey will eventually flow out of BTC and back into alts.
Innit?Screw it. Moon.  Just noticed that BTC is back over 50% of all alts |
|
|
|
Nope. I don't like it. I can't properly celebrate when alt coiners suffer like this. They're degenerates, but they're our degenerates.
Also, because rotation.
Nah as someone else mentioned they need to find their use case, otherwise they'll find themselves redundant when side chains come in |
|
|
|
It does seem that BCH efforts are being redirected in what i can only assume is anticipation of seg2x but they kinda shot themselves in the foot and now have to keep two fronts open. They're spreading thin and can't go in either direction without pissing off their support base. It's ironic that they undermined themselves with a BCH, as without it it'd be much easier for them to rally troops behind 2x
If they were smart, they would have forgot about 2x and just did a soft fork of segwit onto bch. Segwit 8X FTW. They were too committed yelling that segwit will blow up and burn in flames. No turning back now. I'm guessing they're in disarray now just like their user base without a clear signal on what to do next. They have limited resources and can't support 2x without taking some out of BCH |
|
|
|
|
It does seem that BCH efforts are being redirected in what i can only assume is anticipation of seg2x but they kinda shot themselves in the foot and now have to keep two fronts open. They're spreading thin and can't go in either direction without pissing off their support base. It's ironic that they undermined themselves with a BCH, as without it it'd be much easier for them to rally troops behind 2x
|
|
|
|
Your BTC transaction will be replayed on BTC2X.
That's by design, for maximum disruption. A hostile takeover attempt by any reasonable standards. I think splitting BTC-B2X will require mixing freshly mined coins into one's transactions. The landing chain of the transaction will be the chain where the fresh coins were mined. I still have to figure out how to do that. There seems to be a different way invoving timelocked transactions - but I won't have a clue about this bit of magic until I research the matter. BTW, for the technically knowledgeable: pointers would be welcome  There is going to be opt-in replay protection. (Why opt-in and not strong, see https://bitcointechtalk.com/how-segwit2x-replay-protection-works-1a5e41767103) To split your coins On BTC chain you have some coins in address (A), you send your coins to another address you own (B), and include a further special recipient address 3Bit1xA4apyzgmFNT2k8Pvnd6zb6TnwcTi to whom you send a few satoshis. (You have to use send to many option in your wallet, to send them at once). Any transactions that contain this special address will be ignored by 2X miners. Once this is successful, you will have your BTC in an address(B) you own. Now you switch to the 2X chain, and send again from your first address (A), this time to a different addresses (C) you own this time omitting the special recipient address. After this: A is empty on both chains B contains BTC coins C contains 2X coins Huh WTF!?!? |
|
|
|
He got lucky and made some money on the internet. Now he thinks he's a fucking genius. It's a common problem around here.
No, apparently the real geniuses are the accounts on this thread that want to convince everyone that that Bitcoin core developers are completely and woefully incompetent, that Bitcoin still sucks and if it just had bigger blocks it would take over the whole fkn world. See BCH and their dev team for complete fail. Why does it make you so upset that other people see the world differently than you do? If they are as wrong as you believe, you should just let time prove you right. Instead, you get your panties in a bunch whenever someone says anything you disagree with. I have no problem at all with the exchange/sharing of ideas and non-confrontational debate. It's healthy and should be applauded. But c'mon, this whole block size thing? FFS, it's getting really old guys. Like for years and years now has this topic been discussed and debated ad nauseam. By internet armchair warrior geniuses who have no computer programming or blockchain coding expertise, but somehow think they know better than the very people involved with the project, the Bitcoin Core dev team. The block size debate is a dead horse that has been beaten so much over the years, it's been pounded into complete dust. And then these same people, after years and years of flooding the forums with teeth gnashing, circular and confrontational debate, FINALLY get what they want (BCH w/ 8MB block limit) and their own dev team separate from Core, and then they have the audacity to dismiss it lightly and come back and continue the debate around shoving bigger blocks into Bitcoin? Like now BCH wasn't somehow good enough, wasn't what they wanted after all? I thought that bigger blocks was the answer to all of Bitcoin's problems? Wasn't BCH supposed to solve everything? These people aren't just debating and discussing ideas. They are trolling. Oh! I get it; and since it was already discussed to the point of exhaustion, we'd better discuss the Las Vegas conspiracy, right?. Out of sarcasm, there is a pink elephant in the room and you don't want to see it. Now, more than 90% of hash power signaling part x2 of the NY agreement, and you're pretending there's nothing to discuss here? 90% of people are asking for a pay raise? No way!! STOP THE PRESSES!!!!!!! Or are we assuming what's good for miners is good for the environment as a whole? Miners are a tool, they don't get to make the rules, they just need to follow them or fork off |
|
|
|
This is Bitcoin sub forum, not a BCH sub forum. You have the coin with big blocks that you so desperately wanted, and you got it. So again, why do you repeatedly keep coming back here? Why aren't you off with your little tribe?
Oh, I know why. Because you are a troll. Because only a troll keeps coming back to a sub forum thread after they supposedly got what they wanted. Quit trying to 'save' anyone here from anything. We don't need saving. Everyone here knows what Bitcoin is and what BCH is. And people here want to discuss Bitcoin, not BCH. Nor want to discuss how to turn Bitcoin in BCH.
I am discussing Bitcoin. I am discussing Bitcoin Segwit Core, Bitcoin Segwit 2M, and Bitcoin Cash. Life is a game of probabilities. While I am confident that BCH will eventually be recognized as the One True Bitcoin, only a fool would ascribe 100% to any such outcome. As such, if there is a case for improving Segwit, I am going to make it. I am decidedly not a troll. Are you a troll? Is Segwit Core 'what you wanted'? Then why do you return to this sub forum? Yes, we all (most) probably know what Bitcoin is. I doubt, however, that everyone here was complicit with you appointing yourself arbiter as to what may or may not witness being discussed here. Regardless, it is quite clear that at least some have not yet heard the fact that onboarding the world will take decades at 1MB, and that neither segwit nor LN ameliorates this issue, while block size increases do. If you really want to wallow in willful ignorance, feel free to ignore me. I'd be a little sad -- I seem to remember us having cordial conversations in the past -- but I'd live. "While I am confident that BCH will eventually be recognized as the One True Bitcoin..." with that logic it's definitely good to diversify so you don't loose all of your money. In due time you'll look back and realize how you were taken for a ride, and thank people who stood up to it oh oh do tell how block increases helps on boarding the world? Would you mind doing a simple math on how big your blocks should be for every person in the world to do just one transaction on chain per day? I'll wait Assuming an average transaction size of 600 bytes and 7.5 billion people: 31.25 GB But that's still less than unlimited right? Hmm maybe BU was actually on to something |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
