R/BTC moderator steps down, announces he is leaving bitcoin for Ethereum

[Money Maker Shaker]

meanwhile in the Ethereum pump headquarters everyone is running around trying to come up with new ideas on how to save ETH from crashing this time.

Shill officer: "Sir bitcoin started to go up, we can no longer use that to our advantage to pump and our price is dropping at an alarming rate. we are already down 15% we need a new thing ASAP".
Shill 1: "I know we can start mass spamming anyone on /r/bitcoin with PMs"
V.B.: "Nah we did that last year, it won't work again"
Shill 2: "How about mass spamming bitcointalk"
V.B.: "We did that yesterday and have been doing it all this month. but lets keep that as plan B"
Shill 3: "how about we release another news"
V.B.: "can no one come up with a new plan, we did that too, multiple times, the budget to pay news sites is running low"
Shill 4: "I know! we go to our friends on /r/btc and ask them to make a topic supporting ETH, that will buy us more time"
V.B.: "this is what we are going to do this time."

[Xester]

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/61sim7/i_am_stepping_down_as_a_moderator_of_rbtc_and/

This is actually a very good read so I encourage bitcoin users on both sides of the Core/BU divide to digest it. I've leaned Core myself, but have exactly the same thoughts on his scenarios 1 and 2. Not surprisingly given his R/BTC affiliation he's more pessimistic than I about scenario 3 (Segwit wins), but that matters little as long as its hard to imagine Segwit seeing the light of day.

I'd point out, though, that Segwit does alleviate the immediate TX pressure, and even if TX pressure continued at current levels that would not kill bitcoin - only throttle it. But I'm inclined to agree with singularity87 (the author/mod at the link) that even such throttling may be enough to "kill" bitcoin in the sense that Ethereum will surpass Bitcoin in network effect, leading to the "Flippening." (A period of rapid change as people realize bitcoin supremacy is a lost cause and flee to Ethereum in droves.) So the challenge for diehard bitcoin supporters is how to avoid this outcome.

http://www.coindesk.com/could-the-super-uasf-break-bitcoins-scaling-deadlock/

If you are  going to read this article there is a way to overcome bitcoin deadlock and settle all problems coming from miners disagreement and conflict. This time a proposal was made and it plans to create a user-activated softwork or UASF. The goal of this system is to give power to the bitcoin holders, exchanges, wallets and payment processors to dictate and give directions on the changes and the code to be used to improve bitcoin. This way we are not going to have more problems coming from the miners.

[jonald_fyookball]

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/61sim7/i_am_stepping_down_as_a_moderator_of_rbtc_and/

This is actually a very good read so I encourage bitcoin users on both sides of the Core/BU divide to digest it. I've leaned Core myself, but have exactly the same thoughts on his scenarios 1 and 2. Not surprisingly given his R/BTC affiliation he's more pessimistic than I about scenario 3 (Segwit wins), but that matters little as long as its hard to imagine Segwit seeing the light of day.

I'd point out, though, that Segwit does alleviate the immediate TX pressure, and even if TX pressure continued at current levels that would not kill bitcoin - only throttle it. But I'm inclined to agree with singularity87 (the author/mod at the link) that even such throttling may be enough to "kill" bitcoin in the sense that Ethereum will surpass Bitcoin in network effect, leading to the "Flippening." (A period of rapid change as people realize bitcoin supremacy is a lost cause and flee to Ethereum in droves.) So the challenge for diehard bitcoin supporters is how to avoid this outcome.

http://www.coindesk.com/could-the-super-uasf-break-bitcoins-scaling-deadlock/

If you are  going to read this article there is a way to overcome bitcoin deadlock and settle all problems coming from miners disagreement and conflict. This time a proposal was made and it plans to create a user-activated softwork or UASF. The goal of this system is to give power to the bitcoin holders, exchanges, wallets and payment processors to dictate and give directions on the changes and the code to be used to improve bitcoin. This way we are not going to have more problems coming from the miners.

This is a radical departure from Bitcoin.  Miners are supposed to be the ones voting with their CPU power on rules according to the whitepaper.

[Kprawn]

If you are going to fly up there with the people who are pumping Ethereum, then you will have to make sure that you ready yourself for the big

crash when it all comes down. A lot of ETH shills are jumping in on the opportunity to cash in on the divide that there are between Core vs BU

and the negative impact that this divide has on it's price. They did this with XT and again with Classic and now with BU. They shill on the BTC

side and hype on the ETH side and it is very clear what they are doing. 

[pereira4]

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/61sim7/i_am_stepping_down_as_a_moderator_of_rbtc_and/

This is actually a very good read so I encourage bitcoin users on both sides of the Core/BU divide to digest it. I've leaned Core myself, but have exactly the same thoughts on his scenarios 1 and 2. Not surprisingly given his R/BTC affiliation he's more pessimistic than I about scenario 3 (Segwit wins), but that matters little as long as its hard to imagine Segwit seeing the light of day.

I'd point out, though, that Segwit does alleviate the immediate TX pressure, and even if TX pressure continued at current levels that would not kill bitcoin - only throttle it. But I'm inclined to agree with singularity87 (the author/mod at the link) that even such throttling may be enough to "kill" bitcoin in the sense that Ethereum will surpass Bitcoin in network effect, leading to the "Flippening." (A period of rapid change as people realize bitcoin supremacy is a lost cause and flee to Ethereum in droves.) So the challenge for diehard bitcoin supporters is how to avoid this outcome.

Who cares about some admin of some subreddit? Everyone on that subreddit is a sore losser anyway.

Segwit remains the best solution, the only people not agreeing are trolls such as franky1, which pretend to know how to read code better than every expert that agrees on it being the best solution.

[ebliever]

If you are going to fly up there with the people who are pumping Ethereum, then you will have to make sure that you ready yourself for the big

crash when it all comes down. A lot of ETH shills are jumping in on the opportunity to cash in on the divide that there are between Core vs BU

and the negative impact that this divide has on it's price. They did this with XT and again with Classic and now with BU. They shill on the BTC

side and hype on the ETH side and it is very clear what they are doing. 

If you look at Coindesk, Coin Telegraph and other cryptocurrency news sites, the daily flow of articles the last few weeks looks like this:

1. Ethereum makes new inroads/new project announced/attracts new investors, etc.
2. Bitcoin division continues as antagonists yell at each other some more. Or services cut back due to high fees.

The news flow has been strongly positive for ETH and there have been almost as many articles focused on ETH as there have been on BTC. The BTC news has focused on the "can't-do" state of Bitcoin, which stands as glaring contrast to the coverage of ETH.

Unless you care to denounce the entire cryptocurrency news media as conspirators, it's pretty plain that the price movements are a rational result, at least largely, of the news flow. It would be very surprising if ETH were dumping in the face of the positive news and BTC was rising despite the muddle it is in.

[gentlemand]

do not ignore the signpost warnings.
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/61rf15/updated_list_of_big_companies_abandoning_bitcoin/

I don't think merchant adoption was ever going to be the silver bullet that some thought it would be and they'll probably continue dropping like flies.

None of them can solve the straightforward and insurmountable issue which is BTC is wonderful for the merchants, and a shite proposition for customers unless they already have BTC.

Nobody wants to buy something to buy something. On top of that there's the volatility (for the customer), the pain of getting hold of it which usually has a premium and then storing it safely.

The people who already have it are reluctant to let go of it much of the time and they're mainly first worlders with other options anyway.

The fee thing may well have added to the demise but the fundamental turn offs are the same for all crypto no matter what the fee or coin is.

Storj is a separate thing and it sounds like the right choice for them. Circle's a darned shame for the average person but I'm not surprised by that either.

At this stage of the game a vast amount of shit is being slung at the wall. Most of it will slide off again.

[unamis76]

The possibilities this reddit user enumerates are rather catastrophic, but similar things might happen. He seems very fond of ETH, but forgets one thing: if there's a general perception that "Bitcoin is no good", it will drag any other altcoins for sure... ETH isn't some magical being. Besides this, Scenario 2 and 3 can happen simultaneously (Unlimited lacks support and SegWit activates).

His view on LN is really interesting, tho.

If/When a cryptocurrency manages to achieve mass adoption then it will have hundreds of millions of people, companies, organisations and even countries defending it.

I also disagree seriously with this... Why would a country support a decentralized means of payment?

Anyways, it was a nice read.

[mining1]

Well, as i said, bitcoin is a victim of it's own success. Bitcoin worked like a ponzi scheme and people at the base got rich, then they turned bitcoin against everything it meant to protect their own interest and increase short term value. So instead of a technological marvel that was supposed to become people's money it became a centralized cult because short term thinkers that got rich thought they know best. And here we are. How can they come with a real solution now after years of brainwashing telling everyone hardforks are bad ?

Hardfork at this point is risky, bitcoin can die for many reasons. The alternative is to continue like this, the price can bounce back and forth but it will be a mid to long term dead cat bounce. Eth next week gets offchain scaling with raiden, and next year on chain scaling with casper. That will be the last nail in the coffin, assuming raiden and zksnarks in 2 months won't start a snowball effect.

[OneUnderBridge]

If you are going to fly up there with the people who are pumping Ethereum, then you will have to make sure that you ready yourself for the big

crash when it all comes down. A lot of ETH shills are jumping in on the opportunity to cash in on the divide that there are between Core vs BU

and the negative impact that this divide has on it's price. They did this with XT and again with Classic and now with BU. They shill on the BTC

side and hype on the ETH side and it is very clear what they are doing. 

If you look at Coindesk, Coin Telegraph and other cryptocurrency news sites, the daily flow of articles the last few weeks looks like this:

1. Ethereum makes new inroads/new project announced/attracts new investors, etc.
2. Bitcoin division continues as antagonists yell at each other some more. Or services cut back due to high fees.

The news flow has been strongly positive for ETH and there have been almost as many articles focused on ETH as there have been on BTC. The BTC news has focused on the "can't-do" state of Bitcoin, which stands as glaring contrast to the coverage of ETH.

Unless you care to denounce the entire cryptocurrency news media as conspirators, it's pretty plain that the price movements are a rational result, at least largely, of the news flow. It would be very surprising if ETH were dumping in the face of the positive news and BTC was rising despite the muddle it is in.

Yes, this is what I've been noticing too. And, that's what confuses me. It appears to me like there's one group who stubbornly keeps holding onto an aging bitcoin protocol while a much larger community is looking toward more functional platforms. It's confusing and seems to be counter intuitive at times.

[btbrae]

Try explaining Ethereum to joe public. Good luck with that. They will probably just laugh in your face. It's a ridiculous name for one.

This is end-game discussion. A lot of people avoid altcoins because digital currency hasn't penetrated even the most outer layer of mainstream yet. It is like diluting your engine oil, you'll have more of it, but don't expect it to get you anywhere. If Bitcoin fails, that's it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsx2vdn7gpY

[jonald_fyookball]

  It's a ridiculous name for one.