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

[tekmobile]

Bitcoin XT (RIP)
Bitcoin Classic (RIP)
Bitcoin Unlimited (RIP)
Bitcoin Cash  (Life Support)
Bitcoin Gold (TBA)
Bitcoin 2x (TBA)

At least the cash guys didn't call it "Bitcoin" like the 2X gang will call their altcoin.

I will give them that at least they did it right with replay protection but if you split properly then replay protection makes no difference it will only catch the inexperienced

[1714288571]

1714288571

[1714288571]

1714288571

[1714288571]

1714288571

[1714288571]

1714288571

[classicsucks]

Will the fork with Bitcoin Gold actually work the same way as the fork with Bitcoin Cash in terms of "extra" coins?

No this the fork of original Bitcoin not the clone one so stop dreaming to get free coins while holding BCH. If you have BTC than you will get this coin for free from my point of view BCH will continue as altcoin for forever.

Just like dogecoin

Only difference and possible value proposition for BCC is lack of SegWit. But that is not even a positive thing - SegWit is optimisation and improvement to the Bitcoin protocol - one that has just been proven to be effective and stable in the original Bitcoin blockchain. There is no real downside to SegWit (I am not talking about Segwit2X saboteur project, of course).

The increased block size for BCC also has no advantage and rather disadvantages - it is a dumb way of solving scaling issues, that increased technical requirements for running a node. Especially dumb considering that BCC has nowhere near enough transaction volume to justify large block size.

Blindly increasing block size in pursuit of better transaction performance is like increasing engine displacement, disregarding negative effects on efficiency, emissions etc.

You sound like you've chugged a nice big cup of Kore Koolaid. "Blindly increasing blocksize", LOL where were you when the BTC blocks were full, the mempool was giant, and people were paying $10 in fees on a $20 transaction?  And "nowhere near enough transaction volume", a new coin is supposed to magically just use its excess capacity? I suppose having 24 transactions per second (BCH) capability instead of 3 per second (BTC Kore) means nothing to you?  How about 1500x lower fees? It's hard to debate that BCH is not technically superior to BTC.  And Segwit is crap - the spam transactions stopped so it sort of works but has created less than 10% capacity increase for BTC. Lightning doesn't even exist and won't work. And when that spam kicks up again in late October...

People aren't adopting BCH that fast but that could change in a heartbeat when the SHTF with btc1/Segwit2x and Kore 1x...  It's almost like the market is completely clueless to the potentially giant trainwreck that is only a few weeks away... from what I can tell despite the Kore FUD (Lukejr says Garzik is going to JAIL LOL) and massive Kore troll campaigns, 95% of hashpower is behind 2x, so Kore is basically fired. Garzik looks like a complete corporate/government tool so this doesn't seem good either. Then we'll have all of the replays, exchange labeling fiascoes, and hard fork address confusion.

{off to buy some BCH}

[classicsucks]

In vain I bought it for $ 500, now I do not know what to do with it

imho, cut your losses and sell it but keep an eye on the chart, in case it goes into a pump. You could buy quick and sell higher to make less loss if you have that kind of time.

Keep only what you can afford to lose. I bought enough at $500, and will hold as a hedge against a bad event in BTC. If cash fails, then so be it.

I did the same with ETC, knowing that ETC would most likely fail, but on the basis that a division of investment between ETH and ETC would give a spread of risk.

That makes sense.

It is always about the developers first, and the community. The chains with the greatest agregation of development talent will have the best and most relevant tools and software. Community and distribution are important, but they tend to grow from the development ecosystem.

The effective airdrop in ETC and in BCash provided a starting distribution, but it was only a snapshot, and will likely be siphoned away slowly by the gravity of the system with the greater mass.

The conclusion so far is that Core is the winner. Relative price movement will confirm that, as it is doing right now.

===>  We likely need LESS development  


The concept of "community" has been thoroughly debunked.  

BCH ass hodlers are rekt    lol

Ironic, coming from a shitcoin pumper such as yourself... How's that FLO LOL?

[riils]

You sound like you've chugged a nice big cup of Kore Koolaid. "Blindly increasing blocksize", LOL where were you when the BTC blocks were full, the mempool was giant, and people were paying $10 in fees on a $20 transaction?  And "nowhere near enough transaction volume", a new coin is supposed to magically just use its excess capacity? I suppose having 24 transactions per second (BCH) capability instead of 3 per second (BTC Kore) means nothing to you?  How about 1500x lower fees? It's hard to debate that BCH is not technically superior to BTC.  And Segwit is crap - the spam transactions stopped so it sort of works but has created less than 10% capacity increase for BTC. Lightning doesn't even exist and won't work. And when that spam kicks up again in late October...

People aren't adopting BCH that fast but that could change in a heartbeat when the SHTF with btc1/Segwit2x and Kore 1x...  It's almost like the market is completely clueless to the potentially giant trainwreck that is only a few weeks away... from what I can tell despite the Kore FUD (Lukejr says Garzik is going to JAIL LOL) and massive Kore troll campaigns, 95% of hashpower is behind 2x, so Kore is basically fired. Garzik looks like a complete corporate/government tool so this doesn't seem good either. Then we'll have all of the replays, exchange labeling fiascoes, and hard fork address confusion.

{off to buy some BCH}

You are bashing the team of brilliant minds that built bitcoin and wrote 99.99% of code in your Bitcoin C(r)ash fork.

The 2X is nothing but attempt to steal Bitcoin entirely by stealing the client code access. The powers behind it figured that it's far easier and million times cheaper to gain control over Bitcoin via sabotage (buying out Garzik and few others), then it is with monopolizing mining power or simply buying up coins.

Trust me, the Core (or "Kore" as you spell it for some reason) know better what solutions to apply for the scaling problem, which is alleviated for now with segwit anyway. Segwit, of course is an engineering solution to the problem (one of many that will follow), not a trivial block increase. And 2X as well as Cash or any other fork "teams" have never been about long term future of Bitcoin or clever engineering in general. They were always about politics and attempts to gain power.

[classicsucks]

You sound like you've chugged a nice big cup of Kore Koolaid. "Blindly increasing blocksize", LOL where were you when the BTC blocks were full, the mempool was giant, and people were paying $10 in fees on a $20 transaction?  And "nowhere near enough transaction volume", a new coin is supposed to magically just use its excess capacity? I suppose having 24 transactions per second (BCH) capability instead of 3 per second (BTC Kore) means nothing to you?  How about 1500x lower fees? It's hard to debate that BCH is not technically superior to BTC.  And Segwit is crap - the spam transactions stopped so it sort of works but has created less than 10% capacity increase for BTC. Lightning doesn't even exist and won't work. And when that spam kicks up again in late October...

People aren't adopting BCH that fast but that could change in a heartbeat when the SHTF with btc1/Segwit2x and Kore 1x...  It's almost like the market is completely clueless to the potentially giant trainwreck that is only a few weeks away... from what I can tell despite the Kore FUD (Lukejr says Garzik is going to JAIL LOL) and massive Kore troll campaigns, 95% of hashpower is behind 2x, so Kore is basically fired. Garzik looks like a complete corporate/government tool so this doesn't seem good either. Then we'll have all of the replays, exchange labeling fiascoes, and hard fork address confusion.

{off to buy some BCH}

You are bashing the team of brilliant minds that built bitcoin and wrote 99.99% of code in your Bitcoin C(r)ash fork.

The 2X is nothing but attempt to steal Bitcoin entirely by stealing the client code access. The powers behind it figured that it's far easier and million times cheaper to gain control over Bitcoin via sabotage (buying out Garzik and few others), then it is with monopolizing mining power or simply buying up coins.

Trust me, the Core (or "Kore" as you spell it for some reason) know better what solutions to apply for the scaling problem, which is alleviated for now with segwit anyway. Segwit, of course is an engineering solution to the problem (one of many that will follow), not a trivial block increase. And 2X as well as Cash or any other fork "teams" have never been about long term future of Bitcoin or clever engineering in general. They were always about politics and attempts to gain power.

No. The current Kore team has very few of the original members who wrote 99% of the code. The current Kore team is the people who ousted the finest devs from Bitcoin development (Satoshi, Gavin, Hearn, Garzik, etc.) with vicious trolling tactics and a cult-like devotion to small blocks and Segwit. In particular Maxwell is a nasty sort of guy - I won't deny that he's a good coder but he is absolutely toxic to the entire scene. Look at my username, I used to be a Kore minion myself, buying in to all of these R3KT campaigns full of personal attacks on devs who didn't tow the Kore party line. Now I read the works of "dissidents" who challenge Segwit/Lightning/small blocks 4ever propaganda, and it's crystal clear how short-sighted and simply wrong these Blockstreamers are.

I agree that 2x is a corporate takeover, why do you think I'm such a Bitcoin Cash fan?  When an open source project gets corrupted by bad people with an inability to make good decisions, it gets forked and improved on by a fresh set of people with renewed idealism. That's the history of open source.

[gembitz]

$50 par value ~ i'll pay that cuz thats where i saw bitcoinSatoshi make moves    lol

[TeraBite]

$50 par value ~ i'll pay that cuz thats where i saw bitcoinSatoshi make moves    lol

You have to wait so long for this moment but I don't think you will get succeed to pick at this value. This coin still has good support than it bounce back soon once the accumulation will be done.

[Ngewex Yuk]

$50 par value ~ i'll pay that cuz thats where i saw bitcoinSatoshi make moves    lol

You have to wait so long for this moment but I don't think you will get succeed to pick at this value. This coin still has good support than it bounce back soon once the accumulation will be done.

Yes agree, it seems like it takes a long time and is difficult to achieve, I'm sure the BCH price will not drop under $ 100, this is a good time to invest the price of about $ 300 next year will reach at least $ 1000.

[tekmobile]

$50 par value ~ i'll pay that cuz thats where i saw bitcoinSatoshi make moves    lol

You have to wait so long for this moment but I don't think you will get succeed to pick at this value. This coin still has good support than it bounce back soon once the accumulation will be done.

Yes agree, it seems like it takes a long time and is difficult to achieve, I'm sure the BCH price will not drop under $ 100, this is a good time to invest the price of about $ 300 next year will reach at least $ 1000.

They were saying that at $600 it wont go below $500 and it's just kept going down but hang in there eventually one of you will get it right 

[riils]

They were saying that at $600 it wont go below $500 and it's just kept going down but hang in there eventually one of you will get it right 

If you remove the mid-august mega-pump / last ditch attack on Bitcoin, and extrapolate the downward slope, we should have been at $0 before October 1st. So we have catching-up to do now 

[MartinGandhiKennedy]

[tekmobile]

And why would we want to do that segwit fixes most if not all of the outstanding bugs that satoshi was struggling with

Honest question what do you have against segwit ?

[riils]

And why would we want to do that segwit fixes most if not all of the outstanding bugs that satoshi was struggling with

Honest question what do you have against segwit ?

He probably still uses Windows 95 and hates progress in general.

[MartinGandhiKennedy]

Honest question what do you have against segwit ?

Segwit weakens Bitcoin's security model
https://bitcrust.org/blog-incentive-shift-segwit

Risk of SegWit
https://nchain.com/en/blog/risks-of-segregated-witness-mining-cartels/

Dr. Peter Rizun - SegWit Coins are not Bitcoins - Arnhem 2017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoFb3mcxluY

Didn't SegWit increase the block capacity?
https://www.bitcoincash.org/
Even if used in 100% of transactions, the increase would equate to 1.7MB blocks. Thus, it is a small capacity increase at best. It will not handle exponential growth or worldwide usage. Second, the soft fork implementation results in discardable signatures, which weakens Bitcoin's security model. Third, it makes future capacity increases more difficult due to bandwidth inefficiency and quadratic hashing attacks which SegWit doesn't solve since an attacker isn't forced to use it.

For those (and other) reasons, Bitcoin Cash was necessary as a pre-SegWit fork. Segwit will not be adopted.

8 times Core told people Segwit is a Blocksize Increase
http://archive.is/6DkOY

Small Blocks Destroy Miner Revenue
https://keepingstock.net/an-open-letter-to-bitcoin-miners-c260467e1f0

[tekmobile]

Honest question what do you have against segwit ?

Segwit weakens Bitcoin's security model
https://bitcrust.org/blog-incentive-shift-segwit

Risk of SegWit
https://nchain.com/en/blog/risks-of-segregated-witness-mining-cartels/

Dr. Peter Rizun - SegWit Coins are not Bitcoins - Arnhem 2017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoFb3mcxluY

Didn't SegWit increase the block capacity?
https://www.bitcoincash.org/
Even if used in 100% of transactions, the increase would equate to 1.7MB blocks. Thus, it is a small capacity increase at best. It will not handle exponential growth or worldwide usage. Second, the soft fork implementation results in discardable signatures, which weakens Bitcoin's security model. Third, it makes future capacity increases more difficult due to bandwidth inefficiency and quadratic hashing attacks which SegWit doesn't solve since an attacker isn't forced to use it.

For those (and other) reasons, Bitcoin Cash was necessary as a pre-SegWit fork. Segwit will not be adopted.

8 times Core told people Segwit is a Blocksize Increase
http://archive.is/6DkOY

Small Blocks Destroy Miner Revenue
https://keepingstock.net/an-open-letter-to-bitcoin-miners-c260467e1f0

Is that the best you can come up with some BS articles I could come up with a list of articles that list technical reasons on why increasing the blocksize is bad does that make it a valid reason.

on another note looks like the miners have finally thrown in the towel and gave up last block 3 and a half hours ago now just wait for the EDA exploit to fix the profitability for them they only need to trigger a single reduction to keep parity any more and it will be more profitable and back to hyper blocks

[classicsucks]

Honest question what do you have against segwit ?

Segwit weakens Bitcoin's security model
https://bitcrust.org/blog-incentive-shift-segwit

Risk of SegWit
https://nchain.com/en/blog/risks-of-segregated-witness-mining-cartels/

Dr. Peter Rizun - SegWit Coins are not Bitcoins - Arnhem 2017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoFb3mcxluY

Didn't SegWit increase the block capacity?
https://www.bitcoincash.org/
Even if used in 100% of transactions, the increase would equate to 1.7MB blocks. Thus, it is a small capacity increase at best. It will not handle exponential growth or worldwide usage. Second, the soft fork implementation results in discardable signatures, which weakens Bitcoin's security model. Third, it makes future capacity increases more difficult due to bandwidth inefficiency and quadratic hashing attacks which SegWit doesn't solve since an attacker isn't forced to use it.

For those (and other) reasons, Bitcoin Cash was necessary as a pre-SegWit fork. Segwit will not be adopted.

8 times Core told people Segwit is a Blocksize Increase
http://archive.is/6DkOY

Small Blocks Destroy Miner Revenue
https://keepingstock.net/an-open-letter-to-bitcoin-miners-c260467e1f0

Is that the best you can come up with some BS articles I could come up with a list of articles that list technical reasons on why increasing the blocksize is bad does that make it a valid reason.

on another note looks like the miners have finally thrown in the towel and gave up last block 3 and a half hours ago now just wait for the EDA exploit to fix the profitability for them they only need to trigger a single reduction to keep parity any more and it will be more profitable and back to hyper blocks

Did you even read tec-bro? You've got a long way to go to fully understand this technology. MartinGandhiKennedy was nice enough to paste you a dump of some pretty well-researched academic work that shoots Segwit full of holes, and you want to reply 10 minutes later that you've still got all the answers? Lrn2google and educate yourself.

Here's a 20 word summary for you: Segwit is 6000 lines of code that will haunt Kore/BTC to the grave. Lightning doesn't exist and won't ever work.

I suggest you adjust your thinking accordingly.

Oh, and BCH hashrate/EDA gaming is fixed. Somebody made an API which allows miners to jump on BCH mining the minute the hashrate drop dramatically - market forces at work...

[riils]

Segwit works. Security is not compromised. Bitcoin is over $5000, everyone's happy, except the bag holders.

[Majormax]

Segwit works. Security is not compromised. Bitcoin is over $5000, everyone's happy, except the bag holders.

Bagholders on which chain ?

[riils]

Segwit works. Security is not compromised. Bitcoin is over $5000, everyone's happy, except the bag holders.

Bagholders on which chain ?

On the wrong one 

[tekmobile]

Honest question what do you have against segwit ?

Segwit weakens Bitcoin's security model
https://bitcrust.org/blog-incentive-shift-segwit

Risk of SegWit
https://nchain.com/en/blog/risks-of-segregated-witness-mining-cartels/

Dr. Peter Rizun - SegWit Coins are not Bitcoins - Arnhem 2017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoFb3mcxluY

Didn't SegWit increase the block capacity?
https://www.bitcoincash.org/
Even if used in 100% of transactions, the increase would equate to 1.7MB blocks. Thus, it is a small capacity increase at best. It will not handle exponential growth or worldwide usage. Second, the soft fork implementation results in discardable signatures, which weakens Bitcoin's security model. Third, it makes future capacity increases more difficult due to bandwidth inefficiency and quadratic hashing attacks which SegWit doesn't solve since an attacker isn't forced to use it.

For those (and other) reasons, Bitcoin Cash was necessary as a pre-SegWit fork. Segwit will not be adopted.

8 times Core told people Segwit is a Blocksize Increase
http://archive.is/6DkOY

Small Blocks Destroy Miner Revenue
https://keepingstock.net/an-open-letter-to-bitcoin-miners-c260467e1f0

Is that the best you can come up with some BS articles I could come up with a list of articles that list technical reasons on why increasing the blocksize is bad does that make it a valid reason.

on another note looks like the miners have finally thrown in the towel and gave up last block 3 and a half hours ago now just wait for the EDA exploit to fix the profitability for them they only need to trigger a single reduction to keep parity any more and it will be more profitable and back to hyper blocks

Did you even read tec-bro? You've got a long way to go to fully understand this technology. MartinGandhiKennedy was nice enough to paste you a dump of some pretty well-researched academic work that shoots Segwit full of holes, and you want to reply 10 minutes later that you've still got all the answers? Lrn2google and educate yourself.

Here's a 20 word summary for you: Segwit is 6000 lines of code that will haunt Kore/BTC to the grave. Lightning doesn't exist and won't ever work.

I suggest you adjust your thinking accordingly.

Oh, and BCH hashrate/EDA gaming is fixed. Somebody made an API which allows miners to jump on BCH mining the minute the hashrate drop dramatically - market forces at work...

MartinGandhiKennedy on Today at 01:48:58 AM
tekmobile on Today at 06:41:51 AM


Someone needs to learn to read too 

segwit is in the wild securing a lot of money currently over 10% of all btc transactions are segwit on and has been active on litecoin for years with 0 reported issues

Oh, and BCH hashrate/EDA gaming is fixed. Somebody made an API which allows miners to jump on BCH mining the minute the hashrate drop dramatically

That is not the definition of fixed, fixed would be that they cannot game the system anymore not that they can game it more accurately there are currently talks of removing it altogether