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

[tekmobile]

How is Bcash still a thing when then Bitcoin mempool is almost empty? Roger got some deep pockets..

https://blockmanity.com/bitcoin-com-wallet-not-support-bitcoin-core-bitcoin-cash/
Roger Ver, the CEO of Bitcoin.com, the entry point for new people to learn about Bitcoin,
 just announced that Bitcoin.com wallet will no longer support the Bitcoin core by default and would give preference to Bitcoin Cash.
 Roger Ver announced this news at the Satoshi Vision Conference in Tokyo, Japan.
LOL  

big old btc dump incoming imo  

And this is news how a central player getting to dictate good luck but Bitcoin . Com is not a point of entry for most new users

BCH didn't see it's usual pump before the so called Satoshi vision conference because nobody cares anymore it's gotten so predictable.

it did look like it tried a few times but was immediately dumped back down as baghokders sold their position

[BuyCheck]

How is Bcash still a thing when then Bitcoin mempool is almost empty? Roger got some deep pockets..

https://blockmanity.com/bitcoin-com-wallet-not-support-bitcoin-core-bitcoin-cash/
Roger Ver, the CEO of Bitcoin.com, the entry point for new people to learn about Bitcoin,
 just announced that Bitcoin.com wallet will no longer support the Bitcoin core by default and would give preference to Bitcoin Cash.
 Roger Ver announced this news at the Satoshi Vision Conference in Tokyo, Japan.
LOL  

big old btc dump incoming imo  

As long as he refers to it as Bcash, instead of trying to deceive new users into buying fake Bitcoin, fine with me!

well its called Bitcoin cash on bitcoin.com, so i guess it wont be fine with you.  


get bk to u ltr tek. 

He might screw some idiots over, but who cares... Nobody is using Bcash.com wallets anyways. Its getting puked over by 1 star ratings in Apple/Android Appstore.


PS: This was amazing, thanks for the laughs! 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLtkx-xKaKQ

[vothuong1]

How is Bcash still a thing when then Bitcoin mempool is almost empty? Roger got some deep pockets..

https://blockmanity.com/bitcoin-com-wallet-not-support-bitcoin-core-bitcoin-cash/
Roger Ver, the CEO of Bitcoin.com, the entry point for new people to learn about Bitcoin,
 just announced that Bitcoin.com wallet will no longer support the Bitcoin core by default and would give preference to Bitcoin Cash.
 Roger Ver announced this news at the Satoshi Vision Conference in Tokyo, Japan.
LOL  

big old btc dump incoming imo  

As long as he refers to it as Bcash, instead of trying to deceive new users into buying fake Bitcoin, fine with me!

well its called Bitcoin cash on bitcoin.com, so i guess it wont be fine with you.  


get bk to u ltr tek. 

He might screw some idiots over, but who cares... Nobody is using Bcash.com wallets anyways. Its getting puked over by 1 star ratings in Apple/Android Appstore.


PS: This was amazing, thanks for the laughs! 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLtkx-xKaKQ

In this market, think btc and altcoin, including bcash are on decline

[cryptodalailama]

bcash will be maybe soon in future on healthy rise with tech?

[lsd400]

Notes from day one Satoshi vision conference
https://www.yours.org/content/day-one-notes-from-the-satoshi%E2%80%99s-vision-conference-in-tokyo-d9c0ec1a2816

[tekmobile]

Notes from day one Satoshi vision conference
https://www.yours.org/content/day-one-notes-from-the-satoshi%E2%80%99s-vision-conference-in-tokyo-d9c0ec1a2816

There's no need it's already been summerised https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLtkx-xKaKQ

[lsd400]

Notes from day one Satoshi vision conference
https://www.yours.org/content/day-one-notes-from-the-satoshi%E2%80%99s-vision-conference-in-tokyo-d9c0ec1a2816

Notes for day two
https://www.yours.org/content/satoshis-vision-conference-day-2--links-to-all-talks-595de74194f2

sadly, some people can't be helped

[jbreher]

The miners are just employed to secure the network and are the tiniest percentage <1% of all users so why should they decide what everyone should be forced to accept

Two answers.

1) Because the miners are the group that have the most to lose if bitcoin fails. As such, from a game theory perspective they are the proper custodians of the system.

2) The real reason: because this is the system that Satoshi designed. It is exactly the way that Bitcoin Works.

[jbreher]

How is Bcash still a thing when the Bitcoin mempool is almost empty?

Because the condition of a light bitcoin mempool is a temporary condition.

[classicsucks]

The masses decide what 'Bitcoin' is by the adoption and usage exactly how they decide what their search engine or web browser is.

With SW as a SF BTC is a fork as well and it might be the NetscapeAltavista for the masses.

It still follows the same chain though is didn't fork off you decide it is not forced on you if you don't trust or want to use segwit then you don't have to you decide by the type of address you use

If you carry on using legacy addresses then you are using the exact same Bitcoin as you were several years ago nothing changed in that respect the data is still stored in the block in the exact same way as before.

The only time the data structure changes is when you use a segwit enabled address which in laymens terms just moves the signature data from the transaction field to a separate merkle tree that's pretty much it

Again, isnt that because it was closer to a uahf, disguised as a uasf.....in order to prevent a fork off...which led to segwet coin being called btc and retaining the ticker...

As for ltc, did they need a segwit malleability fix aswell in order to use LN?  

The system that was in place was for miners to signal when they was ready in order to activate a improvement this was not a issue when Bitcoin was early and spread out but since asics and large pools becoming the norm it was getting abused as any miner with over 10% could stop something even if 90% agreed

UASF was just that users running a node that activated segwit without the miners so they had 2 choices come along or signal  ready and activate which they did

And yes litecoin needed a malleability fix and chose segwit for LN

The nodes that do nothing and cost nothing to set up out voted the miners lols
The nodes activated a uahf, why do i say this....because a HF isnt forced on you...."follows the same chain though is didn't fork off you decide it is not forced on you" tek

yea i thought litecoin may have had TM issues, was unsure on what cobbles had changed back in the day when making ltc....TM wasn't one of them anyways lol.

Why would litecoin have TM issues anyone can use segwit every Bitcoin fork now automatically has segwit code and litecoin didn't need lightning it wanted it to remain relevant

LN makes commerce simple I purchased some steam vouchers the other day from bitrefill took me about 20 seconds from clicking buy to getting the code email and activating it

Why would litecoin have TM issues  .................. "And yes litecoin needed a malleability fix" your comment above.
anyone can use segwit every Bitcoin fork now automatically has segwit code .....yes it does , thats why bch is special like og btc, the only version that is segwit free (pleeeease dont start that clashit stuff lol)
 litecoin didn't need lightning it wanted it to remain relevant ...id say ltc and blockstream took over and killed of btc the way it was meant to be but stole the ticker.

anyways forget ltc.

Back to this uasf/uahf, ...so you agree it was an uahf activated by useless ,free to create nodes.

Segwit it nothing more than a malleability fix yes it now allows for larger blocks but that was just a side effect

One of the proposed malleability fixes for BCH is very much segwit-like

Segwit moves the signature out of the transaction area into a separate merkle root that allows for backwards compatibility

BCH's proposed fix moves the signature from the transaction area just the same as segwit but simply moves it to the end instead of to a separate merkle tree but this means it must HF and nobody gets to choose it's forced

Its a fix without the miners consent, the people that have real investment in the coin.
It pretends to be a sf but really its a hf.

Whenever bch makes any major future changes, it will be the miners that choose what happens, not free to create nodes that were used to hijack btc.

Something we agree on the miners will decide major changes the same miners that pushed for the fork do you see a issue here

The miners are just employed to secure the network and are the tiniest percentage <1% of all users so why should they decide what everyone should be forced to accept

Going back to supply inflation just say BCH takes on a stupid infinite block reward subsidy and abolishes all fees somthing like 10 BCH forever per block.

Obviously you won't agree same as all other users that have value and does not want it diluting with such high inflation but the miners would be a dream come true they will hold so much wealth so why wouldn't they pass it.

The whole premise of crypto currency is to take back financial freedom and not to be just slaves to the current banking system and allowing the miners to control the code and changes is just the same you are just giving them total control instead of banks

What is the cost of setting up a node that allows a vote on major changes to the whole system?.....It is so cheap, that it becomes an exploit as the uasf/hf has shown.
Its not like the nodes that vote have to hold a minimum amount of btc (thats how it should be done)


I understand the whole premise of crypto, and taking back financial freedom and not being slaves to bankers system, this is why i support bch. 

The nodes themselves don't vote the users do with our money

We create value as with UASF we gave it value therefore the miners not supporting segwit would be stuck on a worthless chain and were either forced to upgrade or go their own way on a minority chain hence BCH that is the minority chain one that they can control one that will never push something they won't agree with because they are the ones controlling the code so the users have to either knuckle down and just accept or fork off

Funny how you Kore fanbois can claim that "nodes create consensus" but then say "Bcash is a minority chain" based on the MINING hashrate, with no sense of irony.

[Bitbobb]

The miners are just employed to secure the network and are the tiniest percentage <1% of all users so why should they decide what everyone should be forced to accept

Two answers.

1) Because the miners are the group that have the most to lose if bitcoin fails. As such, from a game theory perspective they are the proper custodians of the system.

2) The real reason: because this is the system that Satoshi designed. It is exactly the way that Bitcoin Works.

+1

[hv_]

The masses decide what 'Bitcoin' is by the adoption and usage exactly how they decide what their search engine or web browser is.

With SW as a SF BTC is a fork as well and it might be the NetscapeAltavista for the masses.

It still follows the same chain though is didn't fork off you decide it is not forced on you if you don't trust or want to use segwit then you don't have to you decide by the type of address you use

If you carry on using legacy addresses then you are using the exact same Bitcoin as you were several years ago nothing changed in that respect the data is still stored in the block in the exact same way as before.

The only time the data structure changes is when you use a segwit enabled address which in laymens terms just moves the signature data from the transaction field to a separate merkle tree that's pretty much it

Again, isnt that because it was closer to a uahf, disguised as a uasf.....in order to prevent a fork off...which led to segwet coin being called btc and retaining the ticker...

As for ltc, did they need a segwit malleability fix aswell in order to use LN?  

The system that was in place was for miners to signal when they was ready in order to activate a improvement this was not a issue when Bitcoin was early and spread out but since asics and large pools becoming the norm it was getting abused as any miner with over 10% could stop something even if 90% agreed

UASF was just that users running a node that activated segwit without the miners so they had 2 choices come along or signal  ready and activate which they did

And yes litecoin needed a malleability fix and chose segwit for LN

The nodes that do nothing and cost nothing to set up out voted the miners lols
The nodes activated a uahf, why do i say this....because a HF isnt forced on you...."follows the same chain though is didn't fork off you decide it is not forced on you" tek

yea i thought litecoin may have had TM issues, was unsure on what cobbles had changed back in the day when making ltc....TM wasn't one of them anyways lol.

Why would litecoin have TM issues anyone can use segwit every Bitcoin fork now automatically has segwit code and litecoin didn't need lightning it wanted it to remain relevant

LN makes commerce simple I purchased some steam vouchers the other day from bitrefill took me about 20 seconds from clicking buy to getting the code email and activating it

Why would litecoin have TM issues  .................. "And yes litecoin needed a malleability fix" your comment above.
anyone can use segwit every Bitcoin fork now automatically has segwit code .....yes it does , thats why bch is special like og btc, the only version that is segwit free (pleeeease dont start that clashit stuff lol)
 litecoin didn't need lightning it wanted it to remain relevant ...id say ltc and blockstream took over and killed of btc the way it was meant to be but stole the ticker.

anyways forget ltc.

Back to this uasf/uahf, ...so you agree it was an uahf activated by useless ,free to create nodes.

Segwit it nothing more than a malleability fix yes it now allows for larger blocks but that was just a side effect

One of the proposed malleability fixes for BCH is very much segwit-like

Segwit moves the signature out of the transaction area into a separate merkle root that allows for backwards compatibility

BCH's proposed fix moves the signature from the transaction area just the same as segwit but simply moves it to the end instead of to a separate merkle tree but this means it must HF and nobody gets to choose it's forced

Its a fix without the miners consent, the people that have real investment in the coin.
It pretends to be a sf but really its a hf.

Whenever bch makes any major future changes, it will be the miners that choose what happens, not free to create nodes that were used to hijack btc.

Something we agree on the miners will decide major changes the same miners that pushed for the fork do you see a issue here

The miners are just employed to secure the network and are the tiniest percentage <1% of all users so why should they decide what everyone should be forced to accept

Going back to supply inflation just say BCH takes on a stupid infinite block reward subsidy and abolishes all fees somthing like 10 BCH forever per block.

Obviously you won't agree same as all other users that have value and does not want it diluting with such high inflation but the miners would be a dream come true they will hold so much wealth so why wouldn't they pass it.

The whole premise of crypto currency is to take back financial freedom and not to be just slaves to the current banking system and allowing the miners to control the code and changes is just the same you are just giving them total control instead of banks

What is the cost of setting up a node that allows a vote on major changes to the whole system?.....It is so cheap, that it becomes an exploit as the uasf/hf has shown.
Its not like the nodes that vote have to hold a minimum amount of btc (thats how it should be done)


I understand the whole premise of crypto, and taking back financial freedom and not being slaves to bankers system, this is why i support bch.  

The nodes themselves don't vote the users do with our money

We create value as with UASF we gave it value therefore the miners not supporting segwit would be stuck on a worthless chain and were either forced to upgrade or go their own way on a minority chain hence BCH that is the minority chain one that they can control one that will never push something they won't agree with because they are the ones controlling the code so the users have to either knuckle down and just accept or fork off

Funny how you Kore fanbois can claim that "nodes create consensus" but then say "Bcash is a minority chain" based on the MINING hashrate, with no sense of irony.

Lol, this lead me to create the dumb fanboy 'Nodding Consensus' that is the result if some lead worker shows to his followers what work he's done and the only choice the nodding trolls have is : nodding
Otherwise nobody else of the nodding comunity is able to WORK...

https://www.canstockphoto.com/man-nod-icon-cartoon-style-40342661.html

[cryptoglia]

The launch of https://cointext.io/ this coming week is going to exciting! Ability to send Bitcoin Cash by text on Smart and dumb phones might lead to mass adoption.

[weishen77]

Bitcoin Cash often exploits the good news of which company to cooperate with, but it doesn't see the price flee, it seems to be only the split of bitcoin.

[hv_]

The future of BCH is getting really interesting.

Try to comprehend this and see that BCH gonna be a decider TM that can savely run decidable scripts.

https://files.acrobat.com/a/preview/981caa5a-fb13-459d-907b-2ab2476511b9

Not as ETH, just anything.

Try to read also the zero knowledge stuff and think of privacy...

BCH will unify all the good and working crypto currency things with a cheap underlying cash function, how good is that?


Real good Bitcoin

[masstahcoiner]

any big news for bcash lately?

regarding development it would be good for future and us investors if smth new will be released

[2chandwaney]

Bitcoin Cash often exploits the good news of which company to cooperate with, but it doesn't see the price flee, it seems to be only the split of bitcoin.

Yes, now all the top 20 crypto-currencies are becoming cheaper, Bitcoin Cash is no exception to the rules, like all other coins, it loses its price.

[hv_]

Aaannd www.purse.io full Bitcoin Cash support incoming?

[tekmobile]

115 satoshi payment you cannot even make a payment so small on BCH and took a whole 2 seconds with a fee of 1 satoshi





Here's another for a whopping $0.000086 (0.00000001 BTC) Could you donate me 0.00000001 BCH to prove its possible to make a small micropayment on-chain 

[jbreher]

The launch of https://cointext.io/ this coming week is going to exciting! Ability to send Bitcoin Cash by text on Smart and dumb phones might lead to mass adoption.

Well, it will be another stone in the foundation, anyhow.