That made my day, really

[deisik]

Well, looking at the pic below you can actually see and understand how delusional these dudes are. Or rather the ones whom they are trying to feed this bullshit to:



They are going to have 1 terabyte blocks in the future, and they call that scaling, wow. I'm curious as to who's going to save all this data and where exactly unless they switch to a central server model? But then they wouldn't need miners, blocks, or blockchain itself. This is a dead-end, by any margin imaginable

Am also utterly curious if anyone takes this seriously

[1715167021]

1715167021

[deisik]

Their scaling solution rely too much on :
1. Moore Law, where they think all technology capability is doubled everywhere, even though most of technology improved slower

Honestly, after looking at this pic, I'd rather say they are no more than established con artists, the whole bunch of them, since anyone technically savvy understands that there are limits to processing frequencies, storage capacities, network bandwidth, etc, and we are pretty close to these limits, if not already there. In other words, all this bullshit is intended entirely for persuading general public to believe something which is not true and cannot in the least be guaranteed to come true in the future. Besides, 50 transactions per person as an ultimate goal for the whole shebang is laughable

And they call that "mankind scale", wtf

[asdlolciterquit]

Well, looking at the pic below you can actually see and understand how delusional these dudes are. Or rather the ones whom they are trying to feed this bullshit to:



They are going to have 1 terabyte blocks in the future, and they call that scaling, wow. I'm curious as to who's going to save all this data and where exactly unless they switch to a central server model? But then they wouldn't need miners, blocks, or blockchain itself. This is a dead-end, by any margin imaginable

Am also utterly curious if anyone takes this seriously

maybe they think that in 20-30 years, an avarage hard disk will have 1M terabyte...

to mee is pretty unrealistic, but if is it only a possibility, what's the problem?

[Hivalley]

It's so clear that this proposal is unrealistic,and I do not know if their trying to supposedly solve scalability issue to taunt the bitcoin or so.
It doesn't take a few days to be able to come up with an effective measure to curb scalability,as we've seen with the bitcoin.
Bch is definitely going nowhere

[pixie85]

What strikes me on the chart is the number of completed things. It's just 10% of it all which is almost nothing. With those 1TB blocks maybe they are planning to merge with one of those HDD coins like storj or burst. They would borrow space from them and pay them in Jihancoin or Bitmain stocks when they go public.
The next bestselling book: How to become a millionaire and lose it all in 5 years.
 

[Al-e_x]

will BCHABC make the centralized concept in the future? if it is a BCHABC problem, I think they should look for supporters who are ready to back up the prospects for BCHABC in the future.

they will have difficulties, but if their plan is successful, BCHABC will have a very good development.

[pooya87]

this is just a publicity stunt because they know that many of the altcoin investors are dumb people who only judge the book by its cover. for example they look at how much transaction the coin can handle per second (aka TPS) then think if the number they show is higher then it must be better. they forget that promising to handle that much is not the same as being able to do that.
one way of doing this is to increase the block size, decrease the block time,... to fake the numbers and as long as nobody uses the coin to its capacity nobody will ever find out whether it can or not.

right now they do NOT have 32 MB,... blocks. what they have are 100-500 kilobyte blocks. so nobody cares. increase it to 10 trillion terabytes as long as only 100 kilobyte of it is only used people will run the nodes easily and there is no need for a central server and the shitcoin will pump for a while!!!

[davis196]

50 transactions/day for 10 billion people?WTF is this?
If the human population ever reaches 10 billion people,the civilization will collapse.I'm pretty sure that not even 0,001% of those "10 billion" people will ever adopt Bcash or it's forks.

[Kakmakr]

They hardly have more than 50 transactions per Block, so why would they need all that scaling? ^sarcasm^ 

Moore's law will not even be able to keep up with the storage requirements that this scaling would have in the future and the majority of the people running full nodes, will not be able to afford the biggest and fastest hard drives on the market. How many of the people can afford the Samsung PM1633a – 16 TB now? < priced at around $10,000 >

These guys live in a Utopian dream world, where everyone is filthy rich. 

 

[deisik]

These guys live in a Utopian dream world, where everyone is filthy rich. 

No, I don't think so

I don't think they really believe in all this crap themselves. Rather, they are trying to make people believe in this, to take this shitcoin seriously and buy it from them. It reminds me of all those ICO's with fanciful presentations promising lands of milk and honey, and where are they all now?

[eternalgloom]

It reminds me of all those ICO's with fanciful presentations promising lands of milk and honey, and where are they all now?

Bankrupt?

Some of the people who are promoting this are really delusional, almost sounding like conspiracy theorists.

I once went to a meetup in Brussels with the 'president' of Liberland and he was basically saying that BCH was Satoshi's real vision.
Also mentioning that if you supported core, he wanted nothing to do with you.

Needless to say, I left that meetup pretty soon after that. He's sputing the same bullshit all over his Facebook pages.

Same with some people I've met through Steemit, got talking about Bitcoin and they suddenly mention that they believe everything Roger Ver says about Segwit & lightning being evil etc.
Tried going into discussions with them, refuting their points, but it was like talking to a 5 year old toddler.

[Red-Apple]

most of these are just pretty words on paper though!

for example the fees will only remain low if they think their shitcoin is never going to be used enough to fill blocks. otherwise fees will go up similar to bitcoin since the block size is not unlimited.
or for example the cash address which they are advertising as one of the features of this shitcoin is actually SegWit's bech32 addresses which they copied after shittalking about SegWit for months

[jimbo2000]

Just wait, they'll have another fork in a few years when they try to scale blocks too much and some of them realize it's not feasible while others follow the plan at all costs.

[deisik]

It reminds me of all those ICO's with fanciful presentations promising lands of milk and honey, and where are they all now?

Bankrupt?

Bankruptcy assumes being legit, at least in the beginning as well as making an honest effort toward the goals stated and then failing for a legit reason too. These were outright scam enterprises for the most part right from the start, so I don't think you can refer to them as bankrupt. They were sort of born bankrupt

Some of the people who are promoting this are really delusional, almost sounding like conspiracy theorists

Or they are really crafty con masters

Just wait, they'll have another fork in a few years when they try to scale blocks too much and some of them realize it's not feasible while others follow the plan at all costs.

In a few years there'll be only one Bitcoin. Only one should prevail and we all know which one it will be

[nagobinga]

the days of people who are very downturned are where there is a lot of money to invest but do not get a definite advantage so people who do it again are very thinking first.

[Gloverwrt]

Every new project more times than not, has a ground breaking, revolutionary project, and it is not the reality more often than not.
My first thought when analysing a project; is it feasible and sustainable?
Promises are easy to make, especially when seeking for funds. They are more challenging harder to actualize.

[Theb]

They are really desperate that they rely on this kind of promotion in order to attract the attention of people. This are just desperate moves done by the fork in order to cover the bills they have incurred in the on the war with BCHSV. I just wish both of these forks fail on what they are doing and I hope they don't get the investors they are looking for. The market really hit a big toll when Bitcoin Cash forked and all cryptocurrencies are suffering because of their worthless war on hash power.  

[dothebeats]

It's scaling nonetheless!   But then again, who do they expect to keep those humongous data on their PCs? Also, the miners always have the option to not fill their blocks with transactions, but then again this would turn out to be a loss on their part since more tx included in a block = more fee = more coins, and assume that they indeed push this development for ABC, do they already assume that the number of full nodes will decrease drastically and only miners will have to run them? That's not good IMO. Satoshi must be laughing his/her ass off upon reading this road map.

[Cryptoreflector_666]

Well, looking at the pic below you can actually see and understand how delusional these dudes are. Or rather the ones whom they are trying to feed this bullshit to:



They are going to have 1 terabyte blocks in the future, and they call that scaling, wow. I'm curious as to who's going to save all this data and where exactly unless they switch to a central server model? But then they wouldn't need miners, blocks, or blockchain itself. This is a dead-end, by any margin imaginable

Am also utterly curious if anyone takes this seriously

It is absolutely obvious that this in principle can not be. 1 terabyte is ridiculous! It seems to me that this news is fake or the author just wanted to laugh at someone. I can't even imagine how a man could have thought of such a thing. Except with a hangover in the morning.

[avikz]

50 transactions/day for 10 billion people?WTF is this?
If the human population ever reaches 10 billion people,the civilization will collapse.I'm pretty sure that not even 0,001% of those "10 billion" people will ever adopt Bcash or it's forks.

The current population is 7.1 billion and as per the forecast, the earth will have 10 billion population by 2042. It seems like their plan is to scale the system in such a way where each 10 billion people can transact 50 times per day. Sounds like a plan, isn't it?

Also the block size cap of 1 TB seems like the blockchain cap of 1 TB. Otherwise I doubt some technical team would think of such idea. Either it is represented wrongly or we are understanding wrongly.

But anyway, I condemn every attempt to create a forked coin. It's absolutely unnecessary and get rich quick scheme for some extra greedy people.

[MainIbem]

Their scaling solution rely too much on :
1. Moore Law, where they think all technology capability is doubled everywhere, even though most of technology improved slower

Honestly, after looking at this pic, I'd rather say they are no more than established con artists, the whole bunch of them, since anyone technically savvy understands that there are limits to processing frequencies, storage capacities, network bandwidth, etc, and we are pretty close to these limits, if not already there. In other words, all this bullshit is intended entirely for persuading general public to believe something which is not true and cannot in the least be guaranteed to come true in the future. Besides, 50 transactions per person as an ultimate goal for the whole shebang is laughable

And they call that "mankind scale", wtf

The reality is that smart guys have taken advantage of the new and evolving technology to create projects and products that are in effect heading to nowhere. That is why some analysts say that even bitcoin will soon be worthless.

[Tulen1990]

wtf did I just read LOL

[Raja_MBZ]

Imagine labeling this crappy idea as "Satoshi's true vision"...

[jimbo2000]

In a few years there'll only one Bitcoin. Only one should prevail and we all know which one it will be

Agree entirely that only one should prevail, and only one might end up being relevant but I doubt the others will just disappear, they'll always be hanging around in bitcoin's shadow and stealing away any attention and money that they can.

[deisik]

In a few years there'll only one Bitcoin. Only one should prevail and we all know which one it will be

Agree entirely that only one should prevail, and only one might end up being relevant but I doubt the others will just disappear, they'll always be hanging around in bitcoin's shadow and stealing away any attention and money that they can.

I tend to disagree with this view

Though I understand your reasoning (and where it fails). Basically, you assume that things will go on as before (which is kind of natural assumption). But they won't. During the dotcom era there were many thousands of startups which were all fake and bogus, just like the majority of shitcoins today and yesterday. They are all long gone, and only a few valid and legit ones have survived (think Amazon here). In a nutshell, I expect all these coins to be gone in a couple of years. Technically, they may not be gone as in delisted from everywhere and abandoned altogether, but they will definitely be no longer relevant in the sense you mean it. Bitcoin is a survivor, Litecoin is a survivor, even fuckin' Dogecoin is a survivor, but the rest of the pack are not going to make it

[gabmen]

In a few years there'll only one Bitcoin. Only one should prevail and we all know which one it will be

Agree entirely that only one should prevail, and only one might end up being relevant but I doubt the others will just disappear, they'll always be hanging around in bitcoin's shadow and stealing away any attention and money that they can.

I tend to disagree with this view

Though I understand your reasoning (and where it fails). Basically, you assume that things will go on as before (which is kind of natural assumption). But they won't. During the dotcom era there were many thousands of startups which were all fake and bogus, just like the majority of shitcoins of today and yesterday. They are all long gone, and only a few valid and legit ones have survived (think Amazon here). In a nutshell, I expect all these coins to be gone in a couple of years. Technically, they may not be gone as in delisted from everywhere and abandoned altogether, but they will definitely be no longer relevant in the sense you mean it. Bitcoin is a survivor, Litecoin is a survivor, even Dogecoin is a survivor, but the rest of the pack are not going to make it

Yeah and some of these coins like ltc and eth are real projects and have actual uses already. Some coin may even rise in the future to topple btc. Crypto market is vast and with vert big potential. Bitcoin by itself won't be able to fill it.

[jimbo2000]

In a few years there'll only one Bitcoin. Only one should prevail and we all know which one it will be

Agree entirely that only one should prevail, and only one might end up being relevant but I doubt the others will just disappear, they'll always be hanging around in bitcoin's shadow and stealing away any attention and money that they can.

I tend to disagree with this view

Though I understand your reasoning (and where it fails). Basically, you assume that things will go on as before (which is kind of natural assumption). But they won't. During the dotcom era there were many thousands of startups which were all fake and bogus, just like the majority of shitcoins today and yesterday. They are all long gone, and only a few valid and legit ones have survived (think Amazon here). In a nutshell, I expect all these coins to be gone in a couple of years. Technically, they may not be gone as in delisted from everywhere and abandoned altogether, but they will definitely be no longer relevant in the sense you mean it. Bitcoin is a survivor, Litecoin is a survivor, even fuckin' Dogecoin is a survivor, but the rest of the pack are not going to make it

aha, actually I agree with everything you've said. I think our only difference was in timing or interpretation of 'a few years'. I think the scenario you described will almost certainly happen, but I don't think we'll see real change for at least 5-10 years, potentially more. Though I hope you're right and it's sooner rather than later.

[deisik]

In a few years there'll only one Bitcoin. Only one should prevail and we all know which one it will be

Agree entirely that only one should prevail, and only one might end up being relevant but I doubt the others will just disappear, they'll always be hanging around in bitcoin's shadow and stealing away any attention and money that they can.

I tend to disagree with this view

Though I understand your reasoning (and where it fails). Basically, you assume that things will go on as before (which is kind of natural assumption). But they won't. During the dotcom era there were many thousands of startups which were all fake and bogus, just like the majority of shitcoins today and yesterday. They are all long gone, and only a few valid and legit ones have survived (think Amazon here). In a nutshell, I expect all these coins to be gone in a couple of years. Technically, they may not be gone as in delisted from everywhere and abandoned altogether, but they will definitely be no longer relevant in the sense you mean it. Bitcoin is a survivor, Litecoin is a survivor, even fuckin' Dogecoin is a survivor, but the rest of the pack are not going to make it

aha, actually I agree with everything you've said. I think our only difference was in timing or interpretation of 'a few years'. I think the scenario you described will almost certainly happen, but I don't think we'll see real change for at least 5-10 years, potentially more. Though I hope you're right and it's sooner rather than later.

It seems like we are already there

So we don't have to wait a few years or 5-10 years. We just need to wait before Bitcoin rebounds strongly which will be universally considered "second coming". And then we will see who has been swimming naked. I expect the majority of altcoins (otherwise known as shitcoins) to mostly remain where they are, apart from maybe a few mostly futile attempts at a quick pump-and-dump fraud. But as they say, once bitten twice shy, so people who desperately hold these coins will be happy to dump them instantly once and for all whenever an opportunity presents itself. Numerically, that would mean further expansion of Bitcoin's share in the total cap of the cryptocurrency market. This metric is to follow closely (even if it is mostly bogus in and of itself)

[susuberuang]

well, that's why I don't really like bitcoin cash because bitcoin cash has a founder that isn't too good, even today bitcoin cash is broken because it might be too selfish and can't work together better, until whenever bitcoin remains bitcoin, there is no strongest coin besides bitcoin.

[kelz1]

This has turned into a product that no-one should trust any more. Bitcoin cash ABC / SV all shitcoins that cost us a major BTC dump by over $2000, and a potential ETF application by showing extreme volatility.

[deisik]

This has turned into a product that no-one should trust any more. Bitcoin cash ABC / SV all shitcoins that cost us a major BTC dump by over $2000, and a potential ETF application by showing extreme volatility.

Could not agree more!

And as I explained in my other topic here, when the tide goes out, we will see who has no value on. And with it already almost gone (and let's hope there is no more low-tide), it is now clear that these shitcoins were nothing but pump and dump coins that lasted longer than they should have. People who earnestly believed in these efforts have been ruthlessly used and exploited by crooks like Roger Ver and Craig Wright



Basically, they were playing the old game of good cop, bad cop

[Kakmakr]

I can think of a lot of better things to do with 1 terabyte of disk space. You could fit approximately 500 hours worth of movies on one terabyte. Assuming each movie is roughly 120 minutes long, that would be about 250 movies. Also, Assuming that the average size photo is 500K, then a 1TB HD will hold around 2 million photos. 

Now, why would I waste all that disk space to store BitcoinABC Blockchain data? These guys are living in a fairy-tale world. Just imagine how long it will take to download that in 3rd world countries with capped internet data. 

[deisik]

Now, why would I waste all that disk space to store BitcoinABC Blockchain data? These guys are living in a fairy-tale world. Just imagine how long it will take to download that in 3rd world countries with capped internet data. 

Truth be told, I don't think they are living in a fantasy land

Not them but rather people who are listening to these criminals and blindly believing every their word they utter. These bastards (Craig Wright specifically) had been exploiting Satoshi's name for as long as they could but what they present to us now as "roadmaps" is a telltale sign of what they are really up to. And I hope that people will finally start to understand as well as question the real motives behind the actions of these clowns

[PlusOne88]

When promises or ideas are too impossible, It would certainly be just one of those scams. We could not allow such scams to spoil every hard work the originators had put into establishing cryptocurrency. We know how bad it could affect to the investors to see or feel when they are victims of scams.

[Farahtenan]

When promises or ideas are too impossible, It would certainly be just one of those scams. We could not allow such scams to spoil every hard work the originators had put into establishing cryptocurrency. We know how bad it could affect to the investors to see or feel when they are victims of scams.

This event is truly ironic, indeed this fraud will not last long, and will certainly be resolved and the idea begins to malfunction. We can see all the tricks that are done and deserve to be shunned, not even needing to think long.

[hxtop]

They are trying to submit new things to cryptocurrency and these things really need to hard high tech.  These promisses are too much to accomplish and there are too many things that must go well. Although there is a strong possibilty to fail, it seems that they are trying to get attention of investors. They are like politicians who are trying to be elected.

[deisik]

They are trying to submit new thing to cryptocurrency and these things really need to hard high tech.  These promisses are too much to accomplish and tehre are too many thing that must be go well. Although there is a strong possibilty to fail, it seems that they are trying to get attention of investors. They are like politicians who are trying to be elected

But investors are not like your voters. And what kind of investors are they trying to get attention of exactly? Bitcoin Cash (whichever flavor) pretends to be a currency (means of payment and medium of exchange, i.e. money, in simple terms), right? So why do they need investors if this coin is money, I don't get it? They should be profiting directly from money

But if it is not the case, maybe, it is not a good money after all. If this is the case, then why should we or investors care, really? In other words, money sells itself. If it doesn't, it is not money, as simple as it could ever get. Or maybe it is not investors they are in fact looking for?

Maybe, they are actually looking for bagholders, no?