[XBC] BitcoinPlus Official Thread

[KindHearted]

With a dozen integrations still, we can achieve greater usability, visibility and popularity in the crypto sphere
Just need to find the right portals/services to get it integrated with

What we need right now is an increased spread and wider circulation of XBC coins, as it will cause regular
buys and sells on the exchanges and thus create a healthy market through higher daily volume

[dac10]

Speaking of facts, how would this ad? "Company builds and restores houses" - payments in; BTC and XBC. This in Eurpoe.

[etoque]

Speaking of facts, how would this ad? "Company builds and restores houses" - payments in; BTC and XBC. This in Eurpoe.

eh?

[dac10]

Speaking of facts, how would this ad? "Company builds and restores houses" - payments in; BTC and XBC. This in Eurpoe.

eh?

What is "eh"? This coin and sustained only  by talk, has nothing behind it, maybe it's better to change the roadmap...look Chronobank!

[dac10]

I agree with you guys that at this time it's easy for XBC to go from $3.50 to $5 pretty quick and it's just as quickly going to go to $10, then $20, then $50, then $100, then upwards.

Bitcoin Plus is ok for the guy that wants to buy one day and sell the next but it is perfect for someone that wants to buy and see real gains down the road and earn 20% during the journey.

With the dump, you lost your voice?

[bobitza202]

Association with the original bitcoin alone is a huge factor.I told a few persons about Bitcoin Plus, and after they saw the logo each one of them freaked out "WHAT?!? only 3.5$? i want some!!!" 

[dac10]

Yeah only $3.50 and Bitcoin Plus is 21 times more rare. I'm actually investigating some technicals of Bitcoin Plus that we need to make sure are correct now to scale in the future as needed. Bitcoin has problems because they didn't address these issues in time and didn't address them correctly to resolve. XBC will never have scaling problems or dysfunction.

Ok, if you want a good ally, let me see your entrepreneurial skills. I ask you with respect, you could do that little operation on Cryptopia, LTC/XBC? Thanks!

[dac10]

What exactly do you want me to do on Cryptopia in regards to XBC/LTC?

XBC to sell me, I made an offer, it is true, it is a little disadvantage, but we have to move the LTC/XBC market.

[escapecoin]

The Chinese have loads of LTC, just laying around producing nothing. Many might like the fact you could convert it straight to XBC and get the daily interest. Just... how to get the word out?

[verb]

unfortunately it seems we're going back to 150k sats

[KindHearted]

@rushmybitcoin

SegWit is most likely a bunch of crap. (at least judging from all what i have read so far)
We will see what happens to Litecoin, now after SegWit implementation.
At some point Bitcoin (BTC/XBT) will be doomed, unless they are wise enough to hand over full control to Bitcoin Unlimited. (an unlikely scenario)
For BTC, Bitcoin Unlimited is the way to go, they know exactly how to *really* fix the scalability issues facing Bitcoin (BTC/XBT).

Sooner or later, for BTC, it will culminate in an emergency situation, where Satoshi Nakamoto will be forced of outing himself (by signature proof),
in order to rescue BTC by completely handing over control to Bitcoin Unlimited, by his blessing.

We should learn from the mistakes of BTC, and i mean really learn this lesson: a ship without a captain (or with a drunk captain) will sooner or later collide with the shore.
For the sake of XBC, i hope the team never allows rule by chaos or those to raise their voices, who hold (almost) no coins at all (and may have other agendas).
Its always much better to have few people who actually know what they are doing, to make the really tough and important decisions.
And the more coins the decision-makers hold, the better, because the more legitimized they are to make such decisions, and the more confident
all other participants can be, that severe decisions are taken carefully and diligently, and always in the best interest of the cryptocurrency itself.

[egghead123]

Fri, 03 Mar 2017 20:05:24 GMT

Network hashrate. (hash/s)
0.2649306

Difficulty
POW: 0.00271409
POS: 0.00024414

Coin Supply (XBC)
93508.88975507

BTC Price
0.00243998

274848 blocks

33 connections

[KindHearted]

@rushmybitcoin

I feel like you, i also hold some XBC coins for long term, because i really like the coin.
But most people these days are in the game for the quick buck only, and already consider a holding period of 1-2 weeks being long term! lol

Concerning future scaling bottlenecks:
Not sure if it's even an issue or necessity for XBC to increase transactional capacity, and maybe it won't be an issue in the years to come, either.
I don't know what the transactional capacity or limits for XBC in its current state are, maybe we should ask the dev about it first.
But perhaps XBC in its current state could already handle as much as a couple thousand times, maybe even 10,000 times the transactional load, we currently have.
Because if that's the case, there would be still many years of exceptional huge growth left, before we even approach 10-20% of the capacity limit.
And even if XBC ever reaches a price of $1,000 - as you have suggested - it could still have only 1/20th, or maybe only 1/100th or even 1/500th of BTC's
transactional load.
I believe Litecoin has implemented SegWit not really because of necessity, but rather to serve as a testing ground for a potential implementation in BTC.
Just saying, in case we are using right now only 0.1% or even only 0.01% of the transactional capacity, it may "never" become a bottleneck for XBC.

Keep in mind, in 3-5 years XBC may be forced to hard fork or settle for a new chain anyway, in order to implement quantum-safe Lamport signatures,
or for another reason (i won't mention in the forum here), or maybe even for a now unforeseen issue.
You may have read about the new chinese supercomputer that they have build, and which is about 10times faster than the fastest supercomputer to date.
I am more worried about when the first true quantum-gate computer will be operational, whose architecture will allow the implementation of Shor's algorithm
to extrapolate the private key from the public key. Because once this tech is here, the asymmetric elliptical curve (ECDSA) used for the generation of the
key pairs, will be fundamentally broken. The time to brute-force a private key from the public key, may decrease by a factor of 100million with this tech.
All accounts which had at least 1 outgoing (signed) transaction (like accounts used for staking), could be wide open for theft by then.
And while most still believe, there will pass another 10 years before they have this tech, frankly, i don't think so.
This tech may already be around the corner, maybe only 2-3 years away from now.
It's their current "Manhattan Project", they are blowing insane amounts of taxpayer money on research & development, and are most likely lying about when
they have it operational, it could turn out to be much sooner than they want us to believe. I am sure they have good reasons to let the public in the dark
about the true state of their progress.

[KindHearted]

@rushmybitcoin

The threat of the first true quantum-gate computers going operational could turn out to be grossly underestimated by the entire industry.
They are putting hundreds of millions of dollars to have it functional asap, and it could be much sooner than in 10 years, what many still believe.
We are lucky, if we have 3-4 years from now, to make a smooth transition to quantum-safe cryptography.

Regarding future scaling bottlenecks, i agree with you, that generally bigger is better.
I'm not a tech expert by any means, and don't know what XBC's current transactional capacity is, but we already have a relatively fast blocktime
of only 1 minute (10times faster than BTC), while we have maybe only 1/10,000th of BTC's transactional load right now.
But i'm unsure about XBC's blocksize or the (average) maximum transactions per block, that XBC can handle.
We need a clear picture to put it into perspective, so we won't use canons to shoot at sparrows.
Before XBC reaches the maximum supply of 1,000,000 tokens, we could be forced at least once, to settle for a new chain anyway, for various or
now even unforeseen reasons. And maybe that would be the right time, to increase transactional capacity as well. (if technically possible in a
reasonable way)

The team will have to decide, whether its the right move to embrace SegWit in a rush.
From what i have read so far, many are warning about SegWit having an insidious aspect to it, that it will cripple post-SegWit scaling to the point,
that it will make future scaling almost impossible. About half of the BTC miners aren't happy with SegWit.
If implementing SegWit in XBC, i just hope we never regret having made such a costly step without the slightest necessity whatsoever.

The team has done a great job so far, and i 100% share your vision of the possibility that XBC could grow its market-cap by at least 100times.
But sadly, the community is very small and thus the demand for XBC still very low.
I also believe we actually CAN create a healthy market averaging 10-15btc in trading volume DAILY. From there it will go only upwards.
But in order for that to happen, we must build an entire environment around XBC to increase usability, fungibility, exchange and trading of the coin,
and thereby increase the spread and circulation of XBC coins.
I strongly feel, the key for that to happen is to achieve the integration of XBC in a dozen popular miningpools/portals/services which are used by
many crypto enthusiasts. Such a measure would bring a lot of visibility and exposure to the right target group, and raise a lot of attention about XBC.
Many still don't know, that XBC even exists, and that's probably the only thing holding XBC back.

[dac10]

@rushmybitcoin

SegWit is most likely a bunch of crap. (at least judging from all what i have read so far)
We will see what happens to Litecoin, now after SegWit implementation.
At some point Bitcoin (BTC/XBT) will be doomed, unless they are wise enough to hand over full control to Bitcoin Unlimited. (an unlikely scenario)
For BTC, Bitcoin Unlimited is the way to go, they know exactly how to *really* fix the scalability issues facing Bitcoin (BTC/XBT).

Sooner or later, for BTC, it will culminate in an emergency situation, where Satoshi Nakamoto will be forced of outing himself (by signature proof),
in order to rescue BTC by completely handing over control to Bitcoin Unlimited, by his blessing.

We should learn from the mistakes of BTC, and i mean really learn this lesson: a ship without a captain (or with a drunk captain) will sooner or later collide with the shore.
For the sake of XBC, i hope the team never allows rule by chaos or those to raise their voices, who hold (almost) no coins at all (and may have other agendas).
Its always much better to have few people who actually know what they are doing, to make the really tough and important decisions.
And the more coins the decision-makers hold, the better, because the more legitimized they are to make such decisions, and the more confident
all other participants can be, that severe decisions are taken carefully and diligently, and always in the best interest of the cryptocurrency itself.

"We should learn from the mistakes of BTC, and i mean really learn this lesson: a ship without a captain (or with a drunk captain) will sooner or later collide with the shore.
For the sake of XBC, i hope the team never allows rule by chaos or those to raise their voices, who hold (almost) no coins at all (and may have other agendas).
Its always much better to have few people who actually know what they are doing, to make the really tough and important decisions.
And the more coins the decision-makers hold, the better, because the more legitimized they are to make such decisions, and the more confident
all other participants can be, that severe decisions are taken carefully and diligently, and always in the best interest of the cryptocurrency itself."


Want to be more explicit, what are you insinuating? XBC is free all, and each one does what he wants with his coin. Personally I keep my coins just to work, I'm sure XBC is a long-term investmint.

[BitcoinPlusBus]

For the sake of XBC, i hope the team never allows rule by chaos or those to raise their voices, who hold (almost) no coins at all (and may have other agendas).
Its always much better to have few people who actually know what they are doing, to make the really tough and important decisions.
And the more coins the decision-makers hold, the better, because the more legitimized they are to make such decisions, and the more confident
all other participants can be, that severe decisions are taken carefully and diligently, and always in the best interest of the cryptocurrency itself.

I personally hold no XBC myself other than a few in order to have a staking wallet and am here as a community member and supporter since the beginning and team member since it was abandoned while putting my hand in my own pocket like other team members to keep things afloat until it was secured and stable.Are you suggesting I should have less input in this project all the while working on behalf of bagholders?

XBC/Bitcoinplus belongs to EVERYBODY who has a wallet with a balance and they have the same voting rights as a bagholder with a large stack.We will be ruled by consensus and developed by consensus with funds permitting and a more perfected system of voting that cannot be tampered with will be something we certainly should be looking at.

[BitcoinPlusBus]

Sun, 05 Mar 2017 14:08:32 GMT

Difficulty
POW: 0.00271409
POS: 0.00024956

Coin Supply (XBC)
93541.87440821

BTC Price
0.00279705

275737 blocks

35 connections

[bobitza202]

XBC has thinnest sell wall i've seen as of yet.

Sell Orders
Total:
7840.65150240
XBC

What happens when that total reaches zero?  

[bobitza202]

All jokes aside I think XBC has crossed a check point and starting the next phase. I'm guessing $30+ XBC this year.

That would mean 3 million $ cap, wich is still low  , uh, gotta grab some more while i still can 

[verb]

Let's get to 3m marketcap first. I'm really interested in the announcements that were rumoured about. Are they relevant to the Segwitt / Unlimited question?