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

[tomkat]

I have special offer for bitcoin community send me only 1 BTC and in return you will get 2 BCH on this Bitcoin Pizza day. If you have strong believe in future of BCH than giveaway your BTC to other people and start collecting BCH on this previous day.

What's so special in your offer? Anyone with strong believe can buy 7 BCH for 1 BTC now

[1714911363]

1714911363

[1714911363]

1714911363

[1714911363]

1714911363

[1714911363]

1714911363

[1714911363]

1714911363

[1714911363]

1714911363

[jojo69]

when pump?

[bitcoinPsycho]

I have special offer for bitcoin community send me only 1 BTC and in return you will get 2 BCH on this Bitcoin Pizza day. If you have strong believe in future of BCH than giveaway your BTC to other people and start collecting BCH on this previous day.

What's so special in your offer? Anyone with strong believe can buy 7 BCH for 1 BTC now

I've got a better offer ... I will swap you 1/1 bch for BTC

[Satosho Kakamolto]

I didn't really understand what the new hard fork will change in Bitcoin Cash.

[bones261]

I didn't really understand what the new hard fork will change in Bitcoin Cash.

Enabled OPCODES. This should make programming smart contracts possible.
Block size limit is now 32MB instead of 8 MB.

[Big Naturals]

I didn't really understand what the new hard fork will change in Bitcoin Cash.

Enabled OPCODES. This should make programming smart contracts possible.
Block size limit is now 32MB instead of 8 MB.

Those two changes alone make bch flippening much more likely, and probably sooner than many realise.

Is there any project currently working on Bitcoin cash second layer scaling options similar to LN ?

Also, is there a viable Bitcoin cash version of counterparty?  

IF/WHEN the flippening happens can bch accommodate these other technologies like LN without further updates like segwit?

[bones261]

I didn't really understand what the new hard fork will change in Bitcoin Cash.

Enabled OPCODES. This should make programming smart contracts possible.
Block size limit is now 32MB instead of 8 MB.

Those two changes alone make bch flippening much more likely, and probably sooner than many realise.

Is there any project currently working on Bitcoin cash second layer scaling options similar to LN ?

Also, is there a viable Bitcoin cash version of counterparty?  

IF/WHEN the flippening happens can bch accommodate these other technologies like LN without further updates like segwit?

BCH has to deal with the transaction malleability bug in order to implement something like LN, which relies on the transaction id to be fixed. (segwit fixed the transaction malleability bug.) However, someone may come up with a work around using the OPcodes. Or there may be another way to fix the transaction malleability. However, I think it is low priority for the BCH team to get BCH to scale by using off chain solutions. Being able to implement atomic swaps would be nice. However, Craight Wright seems to think that BCH will eventually replace all other crytopcurrencies.  Everything else will only have very limited use cases, according to his vision.

[hv_]

I didn't really understand what the new hard fork will change in Bitcoin Cash.

Enabled OPCODES. This should make programming smart contracts possible.
Block size limit is now 32MB instead of 8 MB.

Those two changes alone make bch flippening much more likely, and probably sooner than many realise.

Is there any project currently working on Bitcoin cash second layer scaling options similar to LN ?

Also, is there a viable Bitcoin cash version of counterparty?  

IF/WHEN the flippening happens can bch accommodate these other technologies like LN without further updates like segwit?

BCH has to deal with the transaction malleability bug in order to implement something like LN, which relies on the transaction id to be fixed. (segwit fixed the transaction malleability bug.) However, someone may come up with a work around using the OPcodes. Or there may be another way to fix the transaction malleability. However, I think it is low priority for the BCH team to get BCH to scale by using off chain solutions.

Pls check what devs from yours.org have done here. They did not need any fixings of malleability (its not a bug...) or SW at all for a lightening like payment channel network on top of btc.

We need 'zero' fees, scarcity (do not allow more other coins to dilute cryptos), smooth apps and KISS for worldwide adoption and winning the competition with new fintechs like Revolut and co.

[Zin-Zang]

Offchain scaling requires nothing more than a 3rd party that processes transactions in their own internal system that does not use a coin's blockchain,
except when depositing or withdrawing into the 3rd party system.

Exchanges such as Cryptopia & Trade Satoshi already allow offchain transactions, which you just enter the username and the amount and send.
It works right now and has none of the limitations or complexities of LN.

Plus it works on any coin whether it be bitcoin core or bitcoin cash or litecoin.

The fallacy being promoted is that LN is the only way to process offchain transactions, nothing is further from the truth, any 3rd party can do it.  

[European Central Bank]

Offchain scaling requires nothing more than a 3rd party that processes transactions in their own internal system that does not use a coin's blockchain,

wow. you've come up with a brand new system there that's gonna change the world. i know for a fact that the human race has been waiting for a centralised payment system controlled by a third party.

let me suggest a name. something friendly and something that implies money...

paypal?

yeah. that's a great name. good luck.

[Zin-Zang]

Offchain scaling requires nothing more than a 3rd party that processes transactions in their own internal system that does not use a coin's blockchain,

wow. you've come up with a brand new system there that's gonna change the world. i know for a fact that the human race has been waiting for a centralised payment system controlled by a third party.

let me suggest a name. something friendly and something that implies money...

paypal?

yeah. that's a great name. good luck.

No, I merely pointed out LN is not the only game in town.
And yes, if paypal accepted crypto their internal transaction capacity would be offchain.

LN has no monopoly on offchain scaling, many are misled in these forums into believing it is, and that I would like to see corrected.

*Banks are a centralized 3rd party payment system, so humans have been and are using them.*
*Imagine that. *

[European Central Bank]

No, I merely pointed out LN is not the only game in town.

you're comparing lightning networks to paypal. if lightning networks had the barest resemblance to paypal they wouldn't be worth discussing here and would not have been developed in the first place. i truly can't believe anyone who's been here a while would make this comparison.

lightning networks do have the potential for centralisation just as bitcoin or bcash does, but it's not baked in and people can work to make sure it's not a certainty.

[Zin-Zang]

No, I merely pointed out LN is not the only game in town.

you're comparing lightning networks to paypal. if lightning networks had the barest resemblance to paypal they wouldn't be worth discussing here and would not have been developed in the first place. i truly can't believe anyone who's been here a while would make this comparison.

lightning networks do have the potential for centralisation just as bitcoin or bcash does, but it's not baked in and people can work to make sure it's not a certainty.

Paypal process transactions thru their internal system.

LN process transactions thru their internal system.

Paypal requires a deposit of funds.

LN requires a Time Locking of Funds to act as a deposit.

Either way you have to withdrawal or wait for the time lock to end to get your funds.

Paypal can confiscate your funds.
LN Watch Towers can confiscate your funds, if an old transaction is broadcast.

So really no difference, both 3rd party processors, you have the illusion that LN can't take your funds , but in certain circumstances it can.
Research it, if you need proof.

Good Morrow.  

[jbreher]

BCH has to deal with the transaction malleability bug in order to implement something like LN, which relies on the transaction id to be fixed.

Close, but not quite. The current implementation of LN requires a malleability fix (which it has accomplished by means of segwit). However, other second-layer, payment channel implementations have been designed and scenarioed which do not require such a malleability fix.

(segwit fixed the transaction malleability bug.) However, someone may come up with a work around using the OPcodes. Or there may be another way to fix the transaction malleability.

BCH has for some time been discussing whether or not to adopt a malleability fix. And if so, whether segwit or some other mechanism (several have been scenarioed) would be the proper mechanism to adopt.

However, I think it is low priority for the BCH team to get BCH to scale by using off chain solutions.

Agreed. While it is a longer-term issue, there are much more pressing things upon which to focus.

[OWZ1337]

BCH has to deal with the transaction malleability bug in order to implement something like LN, which relies on the transaction id to be fixed.

Close, but not quite. The current implementation of LN requires a malleability fix (which it has accomplished by means of segwit). However, other second-layer, payment channel implementations have been designed and scenarioed which do not require such a malleability fix.

(segwit fixed the transaction malleability bug.) However, someone may come up with a work around using the OPcodes. Or there may be another way to fix the transaction malleability.

BCH has for some time been discussing whether or not to adopt a malleability fix. And if so, whether segwit or some other mechanism (several have been scenarioed) would be the proper mechanism to adopt.

However, I think it is low priority for the BCH team to get BCH to scale by using off chain solutions.

Agreed. While it is a longer-term issue, there are much more pressing things upon which to focus.

https://youtu.be/rfOlE-mmYBo?t=111

^Craig Wright kicked out of China !!  *must see*

[Big Naturals]

I didn't really understand what the new hard fork will change in Bitcoin Cash.

Enabled OPCODES. This should make programming smart contracts possible.
Block size limit is now 32MB instead of 8 MB.

Those two changes alone make bch flippening much more likely, and probably sooner than many realise.

Is there any project currently working on Bitcoin cash second layer scaling options similar to LN ?

Also, is there a viable Bitcoin cash version of counterparty?  

IF/WHEN the flippening happens can bch accommodate these other technologies like LN without further updates like segwit?

BCH has to deal with the transaction malleability bug in order to implement something like LN, which relies on the transaction id to be fixed. (segwit fixed the transaction malleability bug.) However, someone may come up with a work around using the OPcodes. Or there may be another way to fix the transaction malleability. However, I think it is low priority for the BCH team to get BCH to scale by using off chain solutions. Being able to implement atomic swaps would be nice. However, Craight Wright seems to think that BCH will eventually replace all other crytopcurrencies.  Everything else will only have very limited use cases, according to his vision.

Thanks for your reply, this thread is much more interesting when people are discussing the tech issues that separate btc and bch, the governance issues and politics is important too, but the short term market action and personalities much less so, this battle is critical for the whole crypto community, and helping non tech people understand the real issues is very important.

If transaction malleability can be fixed without segwit, and thus second layers can be added onto bch in another way, that would be cool. Segwit always looks dodgy to me,    

[Mrpumperitis]

Ive been catching up on this 1% funding from mining pools...
Imo,voluntary donations from miners to devs is ok


If made compulsory (i doubt it will)... but if it is , i think it would be a bad idea....
I also think funding for projects should not come from the block reward..ever.

1% today ...will mean in future it will only go higher,
Either the funding  will want more % or more reasons will be given to give others  1% and then another !% for something else...

Storing funds for projects will be open for abuse,
Who decides where the funds are held and by who?

How long will they want funding for?
The 1% of coin in fiat value today will probably be worth 1000x more in 10years+ , thats alot of money, by then BCH will have global adoption.

What if the fund grows alot and is stolen "the dao" style...

BCH could slowly end up more like dash than Bitcoin, if we make certain fundamental changes (like where the block reward goes and how much of it)
Probably many more reasons from others..



There are other ways,
 I hear good things about Lighthouse.

[hv_]

Freedom of choice
Freedom of trade
Freedom of economics
Freedom of speach

Freedom of use

https://youtu.be/LcRqFV_1HWI

[shixd8899]

Every time the encryption is adjusted as a whole, the Bitcoin Cash coin is still relatively resistant. BCH has very good prospects in the field of payment.

[mkkalam]

If you are talking about the White paper, then you can find it freely available on the Internet in any language. I advise you to study it thoroughly first and then ask such questions, "the white paper of the Bitcoin cash for 2018" sounds very funny!