[ANN] Bitcoin Cash - Pro on-chain scaling - Cheaper fees

[tekmobile]

^ what was that tek...did you say something   

I think your really a secret BTC hoarder and just trying to drive price down to get them cheaper it's okay to admit if you ever feel you have made the wrong choice  

[winding-coils]

2 blocks found and the resulting unconfirmed transactions are immediately climbing above 70k

https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions

[Mrpumperitis]

i prob one of the few that is either mad or genius lol
everytime i see bch pushed into a corner and people think its doomed...i buy more  

(hoping for my $4600 sell orders of seg to go through aswell)

Suuure, how many times now have you sold all your real btc.

Keep digging.

lols , i do buy back as my previous posts mention, ...sold twice at top, 4400, then got bak at 3900, then again at 4200 and back at 4000 (go check)
im not stupid , need to rinse and repeat segwitters alot , just like they trying to do to bch  

dif now is, before i used to hodl btc and hardly trade it, i used to want to accumulate it,
now i dont hodl much,  i trade it , to make more bch so i can hodl em 

[*MrPiP*]

...
I have no idea why the sudden divergence in profitability. Anyone?
...

Antpool mining empty blocks again

Is that a big problem? If there will be more services, there will be more transactions, just give it more time

[tekmobile]

2 blocks found and the resulting unconfirmed transactions are immediately climbing above 70k

https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions

You won't see a massive drop everyone is still using legacy addresses still but new wallet addresses will start being segwit ones and only then will you see any effect from this

Segwit was more about fixing security issues that allow for greater improvements than scaling the scaling benefit is just a bonus

[Mrpumperitis]

2 blocks found and the resulting unconfirmed transactions are immediately climbing above 70k

https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions

You won't see a massive drop everyone is still using legacy addresses still but new wallet addresses will start being segwit ones and only then will you see any effect from this

Segwit was more about fixing security issues that allow for greater improvements than scaling the scaling benefit is just a bonus

bro...wait a sec...really...
so lets say in a yr or more...if i want to move  cold storage btc to a new wallet...then it becomes segshit?

[tekmobile]

2 blocks found and the resulting unconfirmed transactions are immediately climbing above 70k

https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions

You won't see a massive drop everyone is still using legacy addresses still but new wallet addresses will start being segwit ones and only then will you see any effect from this

Segwit was more about fixing security issues that allow for greater improvements than scaling the scaling benefit is just a bonus

bro...wait a sec...really...
so lets say in a yr or more...if i want to move  cold storage btc to a new wallet...then it becomes segshit?

No not if you keep using a legacy address 1xxxxxxxxx....xxx to make it segwit it needs to go to a segwit address 3xxxxxx...xxx

If you carry on with a 1x address your transactions will be stored in blocks exactly the same as they are on BCH

My cold storage will always remain in a 1x legacy address and I will use a 3x segwit address for everyday usage

[European Central Bank]

so has anyone put together estimated figures for the amount of bcash still locked up? xapo, bitstamp, coinbase, gemini, it must add up to over a million easily.

[Mrpumperitis]

2 blocks found and the resulting unconfirmed transactions are immediately climbing above 70k

https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions

You won't see a massive drop everyone is still using legacy addresses still but new wallet addresses will start being segwit ones and only then will you see any effect from this

Segwit was more about fixing security issues that allow for greater improvements than scaling the scaling benefit is just a bonus

bro...wait a sec...really...
so lets say in a yr or more...if i want to move  cold storage btc to a new wallet...then it becomes segshit?

No not if you keep using a legacy address 1xxxxxxxxx....xxx to make it segwit it needs to go to a segwit address 3xxxxxx...xxx

If you carry on with a 1x address your transactions will be stored in blocks exactly the same as they are on BCH

My cold storage will always remain in a 1x legacy address and I will use a 3x segwit address for everyday usage

ahh get ya
ive got a bunch mined from 2011, never been touched, never plan to move them (+the bch i got with them)

i still wont ever use segblockcore addresses, giving blockstream a cut..no thanks, rather not use slow lbtc, better off using bch

[winding-coils]

Is there any end to the rising fees? I won't move BTC because of the cost, I use LTC and ETH to move because it's cheap, soon BCH.

[Mrpumperitis]

Is there any end to the rising fees? I won't move BTC because of the cost, I use LTC and ETH to move because it's cheap, soon BCH.

my point exactly...
no the fees will only go one way...up, and things will get much slower soon too, its part of the plan by core, they being doing this for a while now,
  you are forced into segshit, an alt or the real bitcoin bch

Dear Bitcoin: I’m Sorry, Fees Will Rise, Blockstream developer Rusty Russell paints a dark picture for the world’s first great cryptocurrency. He praises the benefit of a decentralized payment system, but insists it will never scale, saying that “Bitcoin fees are only going to rise from now on. Plan on it.”

[tekmobile]

2 blocks found and the resulting unconfirmed transactions are immediately climbing above 70k

https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions

You won't see a massive drop everyone is still using legacy addresses still but new wallet addresses will start being segwit ones and only then will you see any effect from this

Segwit was more about fixing security issues that allow for greater improvements than scaling the scaling benefit is just a bonus

bro...wait a sec...really...
so lets say in a yr or more...if i want to move  cold storage btc to a new wallet...then it becomes segshit?

No not if you keep using a legacy address 1xxxxxxxxx....xxx to make it segwit it needs to go to a segwit address 3xxxxxx...xxx

If you carry on with a 1x address your transactions will be stored in blocks exactly the same as they are on BCH

My cold storage will always remain in a 1x legacy address and I will use a 3x segwit address for everyday usage

ahh get ya
ive got a bunch mined from 2011, never been touched, never plan to move them (+the bch i got with them)

i still wont ever use segblockcore addresses, giving blockstream a cut..no thanks, rather not use slow lbtc, better off using bch

Where do you get that blockstream gets a cut from a segwit address/transaction all segwit does is kind of rearrange the blocks to make them more efficient I think you have a lot of misconceptions as to what's really happening been reading too much fud from the BCH team

[Mrpumperitis]

http://veekyforums.com/thread/3186191/business/the-lighting-network-requires-a-subscription-fee.html
yea i do, ive been sayin things like this will happen for past 3weeks...
if is its true , how would you feel?

heres a comment from a reader.
likeme
Blockstream now has SegWit jammed into BTC and it can't be removed, next they're going to lower the blocksize and force everyone into SegWit transactions and LN so everyone is stuck using bank-run LN hubs because they're the only ones "cheap" enough to send a transaction under $1,000

You will pay a sub fee, submit to AML/KYC, and pay your fees to bankers instead of miners.  

Enjoy your new shitcoin, should have bought Cash.



another reader,
the idea that you pay a monthly bill to blockstream instead of paying per transaction is *really* bad. do you need me to explain why? it's not the "same thing."

another...Requires locking funds into a payment channel, like a bank account
Funds stay locked up until you pay to close the channel, like a bank account
Fees go to channel provider, who is most likely a bank, banking 2.0
Provider can force channels closed, require registration, AML/KYC, fully vulnerable to government confiscation


[–]luke-jrLuke Dashjr - Bitcoin Core Developer 29 points 10 hours ago
In the short term, Lightning should reduce on-chain fees significantly.
Essentially they become subscription fees to use Bitcoin, rather than per-transaction fees.

In case anyone try to enforce anything like that (maybe by spamming the network as usual), this will be the market reaction in a matter of hours:


                   bch                                                 me                                                           btc

[Mrpumperitis]

also please read this, im not saying this is right or wrong, im just saying check it out 
https://medium.com/@jonaldfyookball/mathematical-proof-that-the-lightning-network-cannot-be-a-decentralized-bitcoin-scaling-solution-1b8147650800

[tekmobile]

http://veekyforums.com/thread/3186191/business/the-lighting-network-requires-a-subscription-fee.html
yea i do, ive been sayin things like this will happen for past 3weeks...
if is its true , how would you feel?

heres a comment from a reader.
the idea that you pay a monthly bill to blockstream instead of paying per transaction is *really* bad. do you need me to explain why? it's not the "same thing."

another...Requires locking funds into a payment channel, like a bank account
Funds stay locked up until you pay to close the channel, like a bank account
Fees go to channel provider, who is most likely a bank, banking 2.0
Provider can force channels closed, require registration, AML/KYC, fully vulnerable to government confiscation

[–]luke-jrLuke Dashjr - Bitcoin Core Developer 29 points 10 hours ago
In the short term, Lightning should reduce on-chain fees significantly.
Essentially they become subscription fees to use Bitcoin, rather than per-transaction fees.

In case anyone try to enforce anything like that (maybe by spamming the network as usual), this will be the market reaction in a matter of hours:


                   bch                                                 me                                                           btc

In the short term, Lightning should reduce on-chain fees significantly.

Essentially they become subscription fees to use Bitcoin, rather than per-transaction fees.

What this means is LN is basically free to use but the fee you pay on the blockchain when sending your bitcoin can be classed as a subscription fee

In other words instead of paying for every BTC transaction you just pay it once when you send the BTC to open the channel and this goes to the miners not blockstream

If I was to send you 1BTC now I will pay a fee and this fee is what's being referred to as what can be classed as a subscription   it is just a normal bitcoin transaction fee nothing more nothing less but that's the only fee you will pay no different that paying for every transaction on chain it all goes to the same place

You really do have a bad understanding of segwit and LN you perhaps should not read everything that has been twisted to make it sound bad and spread misinformation

[digiworld1]

http://veekyforums.com/thread/3186191/business/the-lighting-network-requires-a-subscription-fee.html
yea i do, ive been sayin things like this will happen for past 3weeks...
if is its true , how would you feel?

heres a comment from a reader.
likeme
Blockstream now has SegWit jammed into BTC and it can't be removed, next they're going to lower the blocksize and force everyone into SegWit transactions and LN so everyone is stuck using bank-run LN hubs because they're the only ones "cheap" enough to send a transaction under $1,000

You will pay a sub fee, submit to AML/KYC, and pay your fees to bankers instead of miners.  

Enjoy your new shitcoin, should have bought Cash.



another reader,
the idea that you pay a monthly bill to blockstream instead of paying per transaction is *really* bad. do you need me to explain why? it's not the "same thing."

another...Requires locking funds into a payment channel, like a bank account
Funds stay locked up until you pay to close the channel, like a bank account
Fees go to channel provider, who is most likely a bank, banking 2.0
Provider can force channels closed, require registration, AML/KYC, fully vulnerable to government confiscation


[–]luke-jrLuke Dashjr - Bitcoin Core Developer 29 points 10 hours ago
In the short term, Lightning should reduce on-chain fees significantly.
Essentially they become subscription fees to use Bitcoin, rather than per-transaction fees.

In case anyone try to enforce anything like that (maybe by spamming the network as usual), this will be the market reaction in a matter of hours:


                   bch                                                 me                                                           btc

lmao, way to compare man, bitcoin cash, lol 

[digiworld1]

also please read this, im not saying this is right or wrong, im just saying check it out 
https://medium.com/@jonaldfyookball/mathematical-proof-that-the-lightning-network-cannot-be-a-decentralized-bitcoin-scaling-solution-1b8147650800

Thanks for the article Mr. Pumperitis! good read man.

[HostFat]

I've added other services on the OP

[x2666]

And finally, what one considers Bitcoin is now open to interpretation and simply because one fork managed to politically keep the ticker BTC does not mean that it is in some way more or less inherently entitled to the name of the main chain.
____________________________

BCH is Bitcoin

BTC is Bitcoin

If a tree has two branches, you do not consider the two branches to be separate from the tree. At the time of the split, there was no "correct" main chain, just the one which was perceived to be the main chain because they used their political positioning to maintain the original ticker of btc. The valuation of these two forks is in flux, people are still struggling to grasp the technological, political, and economic concepts at play here. There is no clear winner yet, this will take months to settle.
_____________________________

BTC split from "The" Bitcoin chain via segwit.

BCH split from "The" Bitcoin chain via raising the block size.

Both forks implemented changes, thus while one kept the stock ticker of BTC and the infrastructure built around the BTC ticker on trade platforms, it is not inherently the defacto Bitcoin.

If BCH manages to maintain the majority hashing power and prices rise to support it, it will become the chain which is used and referred to as the main Bitcoin.

Obviously, this could not happen within the same day of launch, or week, or maybe even month or months. This will take some time to play out. Right now there is a great deal of uncertainty among investors, traders, and miners.

A great deal hold both of their coins, BTC and BCH and use BTC + BCH to calculate the overall bitcoin price, which is a sensible way of understanding this.
____________________________

Finally, when somebody says Bitcoin, it is now a general term which could be perceived to mean BCH or BTC.

There is a lot of doublespeak around this situation, many people are vocal about supporting one side while others are silent and willing to follow whichever appears to be 'winning'. This is like poker, people may not want to telegraph their moves because there is no clear advantage in doing so. Only time can tell where this leads.

+ 1000  !!!

Thank you for the +1000, how do I redeem it? Quoted because I think this answers just about every discussion in every new page of this thread. I am vehemently opposed to the ludicrously high tax fees btc is trying to impose and see core, segwit as the hostile actors taking over Bitcoin.

[tekmobile]

It's looking like the Koreans have finished pumping this now the 24h volume is dropping quite fast value should follow it

Mr Pump you will have a good time buying all these cheap beans