Elwar
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3598
Merit: 2386
Viva Ut Vivas
|
|
December 20, 2017, 06:34:17 PM |
|
This is how I know their supporters are full of shit. They're not behind anything at all, Just "anti-Bitcoin" trolls. BCash was literally propped up so that Bitcoin could have an enemy. Otherwise it would have none.
Most were likely Ethereum folks just hoping to divide and conquer. Until Rootstock and Tezos push them out of the picture.
|
|
|
|
Ibian
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2268
Merit: 1278
|
|
December 20, 2017, 06:34:26 PM |
|
I actually prefer this fad of bcash trolls over the doge trolls of yesteryear. Seriously, the doge phase of crypto was so annoying.
Or the Feathercoin nut jobs. And the Nxt shills. Man, those were the days. What's the most annoying about the BCash shills, is they weren't behind it in the beginning. They were all preaching first XT, then BU, then SegWit2X. When SegWit2X failed to even launch, suddenly BCash became "The one true coin" literally overnight. This is how I know their supporters are full of shit. They're not behind anything at all, Just "anti-Bitcoin" trolls. BCash was literally propped up so that Bitcoin could have an enemy. Otherwise it would have none. Incidentally, tying into my exchange with Bob, being "against" is usually an r trait, while being "for" is a K trait. As in, marxists are against the rich because they are evil thieving exploiters, while capitalists are for personal property rights. K's build themselves up, r's tear others down. A side effect of this is that there is no limit to personal growth for a K, while r's are limited by the relative status of everyone else.
|
|
|
|
podyx
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2338
Merit: 1035
|
|
December 20, 2017, 06:34:32 PM |
|
Are we seeing a triple bottom gentlemen?
|
|
|
|
jbreher
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3052
Merit: 1665
lose: unfind ... loose: untight
|
|
December 20, 2017, 06:37:14 PM |
|
Yeah. everyone thought coinbase was releasing the BCH in Janaury, as they announced before.
Not everybody. I'm pretty sure their announcement was ' by January'.
|
|
|
|
Syke
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3878
Merit: 1193
|
|
December 20, 2017, 06:47:04 PM |
|
Personally, I really miss the SolidCoin lunacy... Good times right there.
Technically it's still going on. https://microcash.org/forums/
|
|
|
|
MelMan2002
|
|
December 20, 2017, 06:54:34 PM |
|
GDAX: Trading will be enabled on the BCH-USD order book at 11am PST. If significant volatility is observed, GDAX will pause trading.
|
|
|
|
ragnar0k
|
|
December 20, 2017, 06:58:31 PM |
|
GDAX: Trading will be enabled on the BCH-USD order book at 11am PST. If significant volatility is observed, GDAX will pause trading. I think they got themselves in some serious trouble, should have done like gemini that dumped the bch to a wallet. Instead, they want to keep the 'instant buy/sell' model having a crap ton of users happy to make some quick money selling bch. Its going to be fun... Always assuming Ver does not have enough money to bail them out :p
|
|
|
|
AlcoHoDL
Legendary
Online
Activity: 2548
Merit: 4756
Addicted to HoDLing!
|
|
December 20, 2017, 07:03:44 PM |
|
Incidentally, tying into my exchange with Bob, being "against" is usually an r trait, while being "for" is a K trait. As in, marxists are against the rich because they are evil thieving exploiters, while capitalists are for personal property rights. K's build themselves up, r's tear others down. A side effect of this is that there is no limit to personal growth for a K, while r's are limited by the relative status of everyone else.
I like that comment, thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
600watt
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2338
Merit: 2106
|
|
December 20, 2017, 07:11:18 PM |
|
fuck them dumpers!
|
|
|
|
gwoplock
|
|
December 20, 2017, 07:16:54 PM |
|
I think for bitcoin to grow and the price to grow past 20k the scalability issue need to be fixed. Fees of 700+ sat/B is unsustainable. I don't think that increasing the block size like BCH did is the solution but a hard look at scalability is needed.
|
|
|
|
Ibian
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2268
Merit: 1278
|
|
December 20, 2017, 07:22:33 PM |
|
I think for bitcoin to grow and the price to grow past 20k the scalability issue need to be fixed. Fees of 700+ sat/B is unsustainable. I don't think that increasing the block size like BCH did is the solution but a hard look at scalability is needed.
Do you think that halving the block size is a solution then?
|
|
|
|
STT
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4088
Merit: 1452
|
|
December 20, 2017, 07:27:26 PM |
|
It's hilarious to see the panic and sabotage calls on reddit and in this forum. Meanwhile, the fees continue to rise: Good graph but also fees would rise in any case as they are a function of the price. Perhaps another scale for ratio of fees to price has to be done to show that increasingly value of the mining network is falling. Ultimately it becomes price gouging as the network is unable to cope with the transaction volume. Its a failure in competition perhaps, every capitalist system relies on any business can enter that domain and introduce innovation and receive some part of the production revenue. This is why the consumer and ultimately society benefits from capitalism over other systems like socialism or fascism where profit is seen as a negative, why isnt BTC an open system any more. I really preferred when GPU could mine, that was open ended but maybe Im just biased there :p
|
|
|
|
nikauforest
|
|
December 20, 2017, 07:30:52 PM |
|
It's hilarious to see the panic and sabotage calls on reddit and in this forum. Meanwhile, the fees continue to rise: Good graph but also fees would rise in any case as they are a function of the price. Perhaps another scale for ratio of fees to price has to be done to show that increasingly value of the mining network is falling. Ultimately it becomes price gouging as the network is unable to cope with the transaction volume. Its a failure in competition perhaps, every capitalist system relies on any business can enter that domain and introduce innovation and receive some part of the production revenue. This is why the consumer and ultimately society benefits from capitalism over other systems like socialism or fascism where profit is seen as a negative, why isnt BTC an open system any more. I really preferred when GPU could mine, that was open ended but maybe Im just biased there :p Looks like a bull market in fees to me.
|
|
|
|
Meuh6879
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1012
|
|
December 20, 2017, 07:34:55 PM |
|
un-zoom ... un-zoom and ANTIspam is a tool.
|
|
|
|
TERA2
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 266
Merit: 222
Deb Rah Von Doom
|
|
December 20, 2017, 07:37:55 PM |
|
So there's basically 33 million coins now
|
|
|
|
Meuh6879
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1012
|
|
December 20, 2017, 07:40:31 PM |
|
Fees of 700+ sat/B is unsustainable.
Bitcoin price at 20 000 USD is too high ... too ? Bitcoin is a network, if you want it ... pay the fees.
|
|
|
|
STT
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4088
Merit: 1452
|
|
December 20, 2017, 07:43:53 PM |
|
Looks like a bull market in fees to me.
This is the kind of thinking I have to the Bitcoin economy, its not good despite the name - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_feedback#Systemic_riskThe fees should be judged by revenue not the fee amount. Or the ratio to price, inversely as fees rise as a higher percentage of costs this represents failure and an increasing risk of collapse. I always want to see BTC spread in its market range and coverage by being so useful, this spike in fees stops it spreading to new markets by focusing purely on an elite in speculation. We already have extremely expensive vehicles to speculate in for the richest people in the world, its joined the ranks of the political elite who deal $100,000 bundles when I know many people wanted BTC to be about the efficiency and enablement in failed economies for the poorest people on earth. Clearly $30 fees exclude those people who barely can afford a bank account
|
|
|
|
RayX12
|
|
December 20, 2017, 07:47:11 PM |
|
I think for bitcoin to grow and the price to grow past 20k the scalability issue need to be fixed. Fees of 700+ sat/B is unsustainable. I don't think that increasing the block size like BCH did is the solution but a hard look at scalability is needed.
Do you think that halving the block size is a solution then? Problem could be solved if everyone adopts segwit. Ture or False?
|
|
|
|
RayX12
|
|
December 20, 2017, 07:48:43 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|