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

[jbreher]

Bitcoin contributes 95% of Bitpay's business.

From advocating bCash now making a U turn. The market has spoken.

https://bitcoinist.com/bitpay-bitcoin-95-business-ceo/

Wakey wakey

Mmm Hmm... Meanwhile, the average BTC block size has been creeping up again. We may already be on the edge of the next blockalypse. Which of course will be accompanied by ever-lengthening confirmation times, and soaring fees. Once BTC returns to its eventual equilibrium of unusability, where do you think the tx demand is going to go?

Wakey wakey indeed.

What do you suggest? Another fork?

No. See the title of this thread for a suggestion.

[1714903241]

1714903241

[jbreher]

Mmm Hmm... Meanwhile, the average BTC block size has been creeping up again. We may already be on the edge of the next blockalypse.

The first blockalypse never happened. What has happened since December 2017? BCH's market share has plummeted and bitcoin has survived just fine.

Un Hunh. And what happened to all that adoption that was building - right up until the point that BTC could not handle the demand?

Which of course will be accompanied by ever-lengthening confirmation times, and soaring fees. Once BTC returns to its eventual equilibrium of unusability, where do you think the tx demand is going to go?

Well that's easy: Lightning Network.

No. LN cannot onboard enough people fast enough to be a contender. Not to mention all the evil that will be unleashed when the chain does not have the capacity to handle renewals or cashouts. Even if it had the value capacity for meaningful commerce. Or even if it had simple clients. Or the ability to route in a malleable environment of channels coming and going, with users wanting trustless, permissionless, decentralized operation.

[cAPSLOCK]

Mmm Hmm... Meanwhile, the average BTC block size has been creeping up again. We may already be on the edge of the next blockalypse.

The first blockalypse never happened. What has happened since December 2017? BCH's market share has plummeted and bitcoin has survived just fine.

Un Hunh. And what happened to all that adoption that was building - right up until the point that BTC could not handle the demand?

Which of course will be accompanied by ever-lengthening confirmation times, and soaring fees. Once BTC returns to its eventual equilibrium of unusability, where do you think the tx demand is going to go?

Well that's easy: Lightning Network.

No. LN cannot onboard enough people fast enough to be a contender. Not to mention all the evil that will be unleashed when the chain does not have the capacity to handle renewals or cashouts. Even if it had the value capacity for meaningful commerce. Or even if it had simple clients. Or the ability to route in a malleable environment of channels coming and going, with users wanting trustless, permissionless, decentralized operation.

Wow... I know enough about you to know you, more than the average person,  have the skills to do simple deductive reasoning...  If lightning doesn't have the ability to onboard people fast enough for OFF CHAIN... then  how will BSV be able to confirm that may payments ON CHAIN without centralizing?  It takes ONE TX to go off chain and then to do do millions of transactions using that SINGLE off chain TX.

Doing everything on chain is an interesting future goal... but it is decades out.


(key words "on chain")

[nutildah]

LN cannot onboard enough people fast enough to be a contender. Not to mention all the evil that will be unleashed when the chain does not have the capacity to handle renewals or cashouts. Even if it had the value capacity for meaningful commerce. Or even if it had simple clients. Or the ability to route in a malleable environment of channels coming and going, with users wanting trustless, permissionless, decentralized operation.

It's already a contender, and the process of onboarding is already happening with or without your consent. All your arguments always revolve around "what could be" instead of "what is."

I know enough about you to know you, more than the average person,  have the skills to do simple deductive reasoning...  If lightning doesn't have the ability to onboard people fast enough for OFF CHAIN... then  how will BSV be able to confirm that may payments ON CHAIN without centralizing?  It takes ONE TX to go off chain and then to do do millions of transactions using that SINGLE off chain TX.

Regardless of the level of his deductive reasoning skills, he is committed to propagating falsehoods in order to shove his weird views down the throats of others. It's not a commendable behavior and frankly he's consistently, unapologetically one of the wrongest people on the forum.

jbreher at work:

[BitcoinFX]

https://medium.com/@Bitcoin_Beyond/forensic-report-raises-questions-about-australian-tax-offices-handling-of-craig-wright-probe-138843251ef5

Already read that in great detail.

Foul play alleged from all sides.

CSW claims to be Satoshi and yet has still not Signed any block as definitive proof.

I'm certainly not a troll, I used to communicate with Satoshi (on this very forum).

Unlike Craig, I have verified myself ...
- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4630066.0

Craig (currently) being unable or unwilling to (legitimately) Sign anything has caused 2 major problems for BSV / nchain.

1) Not signing a stated claim is a false pretence.

2) The continuing duration of this false pretence has impacted on the entire crypto space, including the market.

...

If folks actually digested my own posts you would likely discover that I have not referred to Craig as a 'Faketoshi' or otherwise.

Innocent until proven guilty. However ...

Why does Craig avoid Bitcoin 'old timers' like the plague and/or not just come back to this forum to set the record straight? According to Craig's own story he had moved on to other things ... whilst leaving the Bitcoin community to both establish, maintain and build the project in his absence (and off their own backs!).

Do you think it is OK to retain the (metaphorical) last piece of the puzzle, to place the final piece and to proclaim wholeheartedly "I built all this" and "You are all wrong!" etc.,

...

People in the world
Do not doubt
It is teaching
Which is the
beginning of doubt.
- Zen poem

...

Again, this is Financial Cryptography, so do not trust. Sign and Verify.
Simply, Put up, or Shut up.
- https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/put+up+or+shut+up

- https://youtu.be/4oPddS8HujA 

Cross talk  

[Bitcoin Cash]

Bitcoin Cash fulfilling the original promise of Bitcoin as "Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash"

[jbreher]

Mmm Hmm... Meanwhile, the average BTC block size has been creeping up again. We may already be on the edge of the next blockalypse.

The first blockalypse never happened. What has happened since December 2017? BCH's market share has plummeted and bitcoin has survived just fine.

Un Hunh. And what happened to all that adoption that was building - right up until the point that BTC could not handle the demand?

Which of course will be accompanied by ever-lengthening confirmation times, and soaring fees. Once BTC returns to its eventual equilibrium of unusability, where do you think the tx demand is going to go?

Well that's easy: Lightning Network.

No. LN cannot onboard enough people fast enough to be a contender. Not to mention all the evil that will be unleashed when the chain does not have the capacity to handle renewals or cashouts. Even if it had the value capacity for meaningful commerce. Or even if it had simple clients. Or the ability to route in a malleable environment of channels coming and going, with users wanting trustless, permissionless, decentralized operation.

Wow... I know enough about you to know you, more than the average person,  have the skills to do simple deductive reasoning...  If lightning doesn't have the ability to onboard people fast enough for OFF CHAIN... then  how will BSV be able to confirm that may payments ON CHAIN without centralizing?  It takes ONE TX to go off chain and then to do do millions of transactions using that SINGLE off chain TX.

Doing everything on chain is an interesting future goal... but it is decades out.

(key words "on chain")

You seem to be missing the fact that everyone who wants to employ LN needs to perform at least one onchain tx. Only then can they engage in gajillions of off chain channel txs. No room on the chain, no room for more LN adopters.

How many Bitcoin txs have you done in the last year? What percentage of those were opening, closing, or maintaining LN channels?

Until a cabal of subverters decided to cripple BTC, doing everything on chain was just The Way Bitcoin Worked. Fortunately, in the cases of SV and BCH, doing everything on chain is still just the way Bitcoin works.

You have any metrics to share that may quantify the centralization you imply is a necessary effect of large amounts of onchain txs? No? No metrics? Color me shocked.

[Bitbobb]

Mmm Hmm... Meanwhile, the average BTC block size has been creeping up again. We may already be on the edge of the next blockalypse.

The first blockalypse never happened. What has happened since December 2017? BCH's market share has plummeted and bitcoin has survived just fine.

Un Hunh. And what happened to all that adoption that was building - right up until the point that BTC could not handle the demand?

Which of course will be accompanied by ever-lengthening confirmation times, and soaring fees. Once BTC returns to its eventual equilibrium of unusability, where do you think the tx demand is going to go?

Well that's easy: Lightning Network.

No. LN cannot onboard enough people fast enough to be a contender. Not to mention all the evil that will be unleashed when the chain does not have the capacity to handle renewals or cashouts. Even if it had the value capacity for meaningful commerce. Or even if it had simple clients. Or the ability to route in a malleable environment of channels coming and going, with users wanting trustless, permissionless, decentralized operation.

Wow... I know enough about you to know you, more than the average person,  have the skills to do simple deductive reasoning...  If lightning doesn't have the ability to onboard people fast enough for OFF CHAIN... then  how will BSV be able to confirm that may payments ON CHAIN without centralizing?  It takes ONE TX to go off chain and then to do do millions of transactions using that SINGLE off chain TX.

Doing everything on chain is an interesting future goal... but it is decades out.

(key words "on chain")

You seem to be missing the fact that everyone who wants to employ LN needs to perform at least one onchain tx. Only then can they engage in gajillions of off chain channel txs. No room on the chain, no room for more LN adopters.

How many Bitcoin txs have you done in the last year? What percentage of those were opening, closing, or maintaining LN channels?

Until a cabal of subverters decided to cripple BTC, doing everything on chain was just The Way Bitcoin Worked. Fortunately, in the cases of SV and BCH, doing everything on chain is still just the way Bitcoin works.

Some of the same subversive items that crippled btc are being added to BCH so it is only a matter of time before both liability and subversion becomes obvious on the BCH chain also.  

[sirsplashalot]

Mmm Hmm... Meanwhile, the average BTC block size has been creeping up again. We may already be on the edge of the next blockalypse.

The first blockalypse never happened. What has happened since December 2017? BCH's market share has plummeted and bitcoin has survived just fine.

Un Hunh. And what happened to all that adoption that was building - right up until the point that BTC could not handle the demand?

Which of course will be accompanied by ever-lengthening confirmation times, and soaring fees. Once BTC returns to its eventual equilibrium of unusability, where do you think the tx demand is going to go?

Well that's easy: Lightning Network.

No. LN cannot onboard enough people fast enough to be a contender. Not to mention all the evil that will be unleashed when the chain does not have the capacity to handle renewals or cashouts. Even if it had the value capacity for meaningful commerce. Or even if it had simple clients. Or the ability to route in a malleable environment of channels coming and going, with users wanting trustless, permissionless, decentralized operation.

Wow... I know enough about you to know you, more than the average person,  have the skills to do simple deductive reasoning...  If lightning doesn't have the ability to onboard people fast enough for OFF CHAIN... then  how will BSV be able to confirm that may payments ON CHAIN without centralizing?  It takes ONE TX to go off chain and then to do do millions of transactions using that SINGLE off chain TX.

Doing everything on chain is an interesting future goal... but it is decades out.

(key words "on chain")

You seem to be missing the fact that everyone who wants to employ LN needs to perform at least one onchain tx. Only then can they engage in gajillions of off chain channel txs. No room on the chain, no room for more LN adopters.

How many Bitcoin txs have you done in the last year? What percentage of those were opening, closing, or maintaining LN channels?

Until a cabal of subverters decided to cripple BTC, doing everything on chain was just The Way Bitcoin Worked. Fortunately, in the cases of SV and BCH, doing everything on chain is still just the way Bitcoin works.

And apparently shrinking the blocksize is a solution now  

[hv_]

Mmm Hmm... Meanwhile, the average BTC block size has been creeping up again. We may already be on the edge of the next blockalypse.

The first blockalypse never happened. What has happened since December 2017? BCH's market share has plummeted and bitcoin has survived just fine.

Un Hunh. And what happened to all that adoption that was building - right up until the point that BTC could not handle the demand?

Which of course will be accompanied by ever-lengthening confirmation times, and soaring fees. Once BTC returns to its eventual equilibrium of unusability, where do you think the tx demand is going to go?

Well that's easy: Lightning Network.

No. LN cannot onboard enough people fast enough to be a contender. Not to mention all the evil that will be unleashed when the chain does not have the capacity to handle renewals or cashouts. Even if it had the value capacity for meaningful commerce. Or even if it had simple clients. Or the ability to route in a malleable environment of channels coming and going, with users wanting trustless, permissionless, decentralized operation.

Wow... I know enough about you to know you, more than the average person,  have the skills to do simple deductive reasoning...  If lightning doesn't have the ability to onboard people fast enough for OFF CHAIN... then  how will BSV be able to confirm that may payments ON CHAIN without centralizing?  It takes ONE TX to go off chain and then to do do millions of transactions using that SINGLE off chain TX.

Doing everything on chain is an interesting future goal... but it is decades out.


(key words "on chain")

How can that bitcoin that is written and specked up in the Satoshi Whitpaper AND correctly implemented on purpose be ever centralized?    Smtp  nodes are only some big entities like gmail gmx ...  but that doesn t make smtp  centralized by any means.       BSV   is  that  smtp analogon by definition , commitment and roadmap.

[Globb0]

Im sticking to running a POP node its the original vision

[hv_]

Im sticking to running a POP node its the original vision

A node described in the white paper does .... ?

It is a miner

[adamvp]

"Together we stand - divided we fall"
This all BCC BCH BCD BCG BCV BCS drama leads to somewehere where I was afraid it has to lead - divided community is much weaker and weaker. And looking
realistically there is no sign of recovery

100% inevitable.

no one should be surprised by the outcome. forks of forks are not a sound basis to build something that others will trust.

compare how litecoin have conducted themselves to this. it's pitiful.

Yeah, initially consensus mechanism in Bitcoin was supposed to be based on higher hashrate and it happened very bad that it was allowed so many forks survived. It would be much better cryptocurrencies with lower hashrate would never survive and to focus all developement on best projects! World do not need thousands of crypto to transfer money...

[hv_]

"Together we stand - divided we fall"
This all BCC BCH BCD BCG BCV BCS drama leads to somewehere where I was afraid it has to lead - divided community is much weaker and weaker. And looking
realistically there is no sign of recovery

100% inevitable.

no one should be surprised by the outcome. forks of forks are not a sound basis to build something that others will trust.

compare how litecoin have conducted themselves to this. it's pitiful.

Yeah, initially consensus mechanism in Bitcoin was supposed to be based on higher hashrate and it happened very bad that it was allowed so many forks survived. It would be much better cryptocurrencies with lower hashrate would never survive and to focus all developement on best projects! World do not need thousands of crypto to transfer money...

Sure. Good point. So what defines the protocol that an honest miner should follow?  Where are the legit specs for?

[LUCKMCFLY]

"Together we stand - divided we fall"
This all BCC BCH BCD BCG BCV BCS drama leads to somewehere where I was afraid it has to lead - divided community is much weaker and weaker. And looking
realistically there is no sign of recovery

100% inevitable.

no one should be surprised by the outcome. forks of forks are not a sound basis to build something that others will trust.

compare how litecoin have conducted themselves to this. it's pitiful.

Yeah, initially consensus mechanism in Bitcoin was supposed to be based on higher hashrate and it happened very bad that it was allowed so many forks survived. It would be much better cryptocurrencies with lower hashrate would never survive and to focus all developement on best projects! World do not need thousands of crypto to transfer money...

Sure. Good point. So what defines the protocol that an honest miner should follow?  Where are the legit specs for?

Bitcoin Cash dared to make a Hard Fork to generate Bitcoin SV, at the precise moment that Roger had his problem with his partner, I do not know how important these people believe, but the only thing that Hard Fork does is Bitcoin, I mean, For my Bitcoin Cash it does not have and will never have a life of its own.

[cool4y]

I can't believe my eyes that this misconception and purposeless hybrid fork is still around. What we need in the cryptocurrency space is cleansing from the trash coins.

[alevlaslo]

 Are you sure that inside the BTC LN channel you can not print unnoticed new coins according to the Ponzi scheme?

[mindrust]

"Together we stand - divided we fall"
This all BCC BCH BCD BCG BCV BCS drama leads to somewehere where I was afraid it has to lead - divided community is much weaker and weaker. And looking
realistically there is no sign of recovery

100% inevitable.

no one should be surprised by the outcome. forks of forks are not a sound basis to build something that others will trust.

compare how litecoin have conducted themselves to this. it's pitiful.

Yeah, initially consensus mechanism in Bitcoin was supposed to be based on higher hashrate and it happened very bad that it was allowed so many forks survived. It would be much better cryptocurrencies with lower hashrate would never survive and to focus all developement on best projects! World do not need thousands of crypto to transfer money...

They survive because nobody wants to waste their time and money just to prove a point. Bitcoin Gold already was attacked and proved that weak hash rate coins are not safe.

After seeing what happened to BTG, if you are still buying weak coins like BCH and BSV, you deserve what's coming to you.

[BitcoinFX]

... snip ...

And apparently shrinking the blocksize is a solution now  

Where the alternative solution is to make money (a digital cash !) 'heavier' ? ...

- https://news.mlh.io/i-hacked-the-middle-out-compression-from-silicon-valley-06-16-2015

"... Please let me know if I overlooked anything that could make me a member of the Three Comma Club. I want a boat. And doors that open vertically..."

- https://www.hoover.org/research/middle-out-economics

"... in which he advanced a middle-out thesis for economic growth: “The fundamental law of capitalism is, if workers don’t have any money, businesses . . . don’t have any customers.” ..."

 

[hv_]

I can't believe my eyes that this misconception and purposeless hybrid fork is still around. What we need in the cryptocurrency space is cleansing from the trash coins.

There haven't been enough trolling, so it's still there.

Or

There is so much recognition also due to much trolling, so it's still there.