Next Bubble

[WhaleTank]

When (or if) will the next bubble Happen in your opinion and why?BTC

[formenko]

2020 by statistic and the btc split 

[WhaleTank]

interesting thought

[LFC_Bitcoin]

2020 by statistic and the btc split 

Some time between the next halvening (May 2020) & the year 2020 because it’s what bitcoin does hostorically.

[Febo]

Some time between the next halvening (May 2020) & the year 2022 because it’s what bitcoin does hostorically.

Good so next bottom is in 2023. I will try to gather some founds until then

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Some time between the next halvening (May 2020) & the year 2022 because it’s what bitcoin does hostorically.

Good so next bottom is in 2023. I will try to gather some founds until then

Accumulation period (stability) is now brother, probably for 12-18 months. Next moon bound rocket leaves after the next halving.

[qualitywork]

To be honest one one knows about it, Yes there are lot of speculations as it may boom again. Those are planning to sell Just wait for few more months to see a better market. I went through few research and see there are chances of a bull run by next year. Let us wait for our turn.

[exstasie]

Accumulation period (stability) is now brother, probably for 12-18 months. Next moon bound rocket leaves after the next halving.

How do you know we've already hit the bottom and are in the stable period? All the traders I respect are open to the $1,000s unfortunately. The $3K zone is definitely a place for a strong bounce, but this may have been just the first leg of the crash.

I'm loosely expecting another bubble within a year or two of the next halving. Time is even harder than price to predict though.

[WinslowIII]

Some time between the next halvening (May 2020) & the year 2022 because it’s what bitcoin does hostorically.

Good so next bottom is in 2023. I will try to gather some founds until then

Accumulation period (stability) is now brother, probably for 12-18 months. Next moon bound rocket leaves after the next halving.

Wth makes you so sure? the fundamentals suck, look at how poorly the network faired at the peak of traffic last December. Trxs took fucking hours to days, a single fucking trx cost like $20. Instead of just stating some matter of fact boom that will happen because it's what the charts suggest, why don't you do some mental work and explain how scaling will be solved?
Because I can guarantee this - if the scaling problem isn't fixed, it's not going to ever pump again. Why? we already know bitcoin is worthless in it's current state, we don't need another test of the system.

[harizen]

When (or if) will the next bubble Happen in your opinion and why?BTC

Tomorrow, The next day, or even while Im typing this post.

This is basically non sense. No one knows what will happened. Even how good prediction is, how well backed up a certain analysis is, how technical the explanation is, even how popular or big name the one who said that prediction is, still it's unpredictable.

Rather than to think of that, just do your usual way of increasing your stash. In that way, you will take the benefits and advantages once your expected bubble happened.

[1Referee]

Booms happen when people don't expect them to happen, so don't waste any of your time waiting for them. No one back in 2016 expected 2017 to be a year where the price would rocket past the moon, which is exactly what made 2017 such a crazy year.

People last year had no choice but to keep buying on the way up, while if everyone knows it's going to happen at this or that date, they buy in well before the event and effectively make a boom close to impossible to emerge because they will end up selling what they bought at lower levels. That's exactly why it's good to have the current market shake off as many weak hands as possible.

[mindrust]

Wth makes you so sure? the fundamentals suck, look at how poorly the network faired at the peak of traffic last December. Trxs took fucking hours to days, a single fucking trx cost like $20. Instead of just stating some matter of fact boom that will happen because it's what the charts suggest, why don't you do some mental work and explain how scaling will be solved?
Because I can guarantee this - if the scaling problem isn't fixed, it's not going to ever pump again. Why? we already know bitcoin is worthless in it's current state, we don't need another test of the system.

Fundamentals doesn't suck.

Segwit adoption was low in December and many exchanges weren't batching their transactions. (Some still don't I believe which sucks, that's what I agree.)

On the top of that, Lightning Network is is also getting updates which is going to help a lot.

[WinslowIII]

Wth makes you so sure? the fundamentals suck, look at how poorly the network faired at the peak of traffic last December. Trxs took fucking hours to days, a single fucking trx cost like $20. Instead of just stating some matter of fact boom that will happen because it's what the charts suggest, why don't you do some mental work and explain how scaling will be solved?
Because I can guarantee this - if the scaling problem isn't fixed, it's not going to ever pump again. Why? we already know bitcoin is worthless in it's current state, we don't need another test of the system.

Fundamentals doesn't suck.

Segwit adoption was low in December and many exchanges weren't batching their transactions. (Some still don't I believe which sucks, that's what I agree.)

On the top of that, Lightning Network is is also getting updates which is going to help a lot.

From what I understand, the lightning network is very limited. It only applies to 2 parties who do business a lot with each other, and basically takes a bunch of trxs together and makes one onchain trx. This is not helpful for typical peer to peer or retailer to customer trxs. It also takes away one of bitcoin's selling points, making a permanent record of every trx.
Unless I'm missing something, this is not a solution to the scaling problem.

[mindrust]

From what I understand, the lightning network is very limited. It only applies to 2 parties who do business a lot with each other, and basically takes a bunch of trxs together and makes one onchain trx. This is not helpful for typical peer to peer or retailer to customer trxs. It also takes away one of bitcoin's selling points, making a permanent record of every trx.
Unless I'm missing something, this is not a solution to the scaling problem.

From what I understand you need a better understanding.

You can start reading some here:
https://lightning.network/

Instant Payments. Lightning-fast blockchain payments without worrying about block confirmation times. Security is enforced by blockchain smart-contracts without creating a on-blockchain transaction for individual payments. Payment speed measured in milliseconds to seconds.

Scalability. Capable of millions to billions of transactions per second across the network. Capacity blows away legacy payment rails by many orders of magnitude. Attaching payment per action/click is now possible without custodians.

Low Cost. By transacting and settling off-blockchain, the Lightning Network allows for exceptionally low fees, which allows for emerging use cases such as instant micropayments.

Cross Blockchains. Cross-chain atomic swaps can occur off-chain instantly with heterogeneous blockchain consensus rules. So long as the chains can support the same cryptographic hash function, it is possible to make transactions across blockchains without trust in 3rd party custodians.

You can stay on LN as much as you like. Who told you that you'll have to go back to on chain network after you create a transaction on LN? No, You don't have to.

[WinslowIII]

From what I understand, the lightning network is very limited. It only applies to 2 parties who do business a lot with each other, and basically takes a bunch of trxs together and makes one onchain trx. This is not helpful for typical peer to peer or retailer to customer trxs. It also takes away one of bitcoin's selling points, making a permanent record of every trx.
Unless I'm missing something, this is not a solution to the scaling problem.

From what I understand you need a better understanding.

You can start reading some here:
https://lightning.network/

Instant Payments. Lightning-fast blockchain payments without worrying about block confirmation times. Security is enforced by blockchain smart-contracts without creating a on-blockchain transaction for individual payments. Payment speed measured in milliseconds to seconds.

Scalability. Capable of millions to billions of transactions per second across the network. Capacity blows away legacy payment rails by many orders of magnitude. Attaching payment per action/click is now possible without custodians.

Low Cost. By transacting and settling off-blockchain, the Lightning Network allows for exceptionally low fees, which allows for emerging use cases such as instant micropayments.

Cross Blockchains. Cross-chain atomic swaps can occur off-chain instantly with heterogeneous blockchain consensus rules. So long as the chains can support the same cryptographic hash function, it is possible to make transactions across blockchains without trust in 3rd party custodians.

You can stay on LN as much as you like. Who told you that you'll have to go back to on chain network after you create a transaction on LN? No, You don't have to.

At some point there must be an onchain trx to "settle" the business done between 2 parties. So say Joe wants to buy Bob's car with bitcoin - then never have before or never will again most likely make another trx between them - how is LN helpful?
Bob goes to Starbucks and buys a coffee, something he does once in a while. How is LN helpful for this trx?
Both parties need to create a LN account and each pays each other with bitcoin to this LN account. How is this helpful for 2 parties who don't do a lot of recurring business with one another? a single trx will result in a single onchain trx regardless if LN is used, so in this case it's redundant and useless.

[mindrust]

At some point there must be an onchain trx to "settle" the business done between 2 parties. So say Joe wants to buy Bob's car with bitcoin - then never have before or never will again most likely make another trx between them - how is LN helpful?
Bob goes to Starbucks and buys a coffee, something he does once in a while. How is LN helpful for this trx?
Both parties need to create a LN account and each pays each other with bitcoin to this LN account. How is this helpful for 2 parties who don't do a lot of recurring business with one another? a single trx will result in a single onchain trx regardless if LN is used, so in this case it's redundant and useless.

Why are you so thick?

You don't have to settle it. You can stay on LN for 10 years without touching the on chain network ever.

So no, there won't have to be a settlement onchain unless that's what you want.

How is LN helpful?

Go read:
https://lightning.network/

You are not going to buy your car via LN any way. It is for micro transactions like coffee purchases which causes the real load on the blockchain. LN solves that problem.

If you think you'll want to close your channel every time you buy a coffee, then you don't understand how it works.

[exstasie]

Wth makes you so sure? the fundamentals suck, look at how poorly the network faired at the peak of traffic last December. Trxs took fucking hours to days, a single fucking trx cost like $20.

Only idiots (and those using horrible fee estimation algorithms) were paying that much. Some people spend $5 at toll booths that only cost 25 cents, and unfortunately, that drives up fees, which are a market mechanism.

Back then, Coinbase was clogging the network by not batching transactions and in fact creating two transactions for every withdrawal. Other services acted similarly. Now, transaction batching is the norm and fee estimation has drastically improved. Segwit adoption has also gained ground since then. Blocks are bigger and a lot of users/services use the blockchain much more efficiently now.

Instead of just stating some matter of fact boom that will happen because it's what the charts suggest, why don't you do some mental work and explain how scaling will be solved?

Off-chain, using other networks like Lightning.

[WinslowIII]

So what's the point of bitcoin if all your trxs are done offchain? You could fund your LN wallet or whatever they call it with any form of value such as Dogecoin or fiat. Aside from bitcoin being the first crypto, what is the advantage in using it with LN vs some other form of electronic value?
What makes bitcoin unique is that is a decentralized peer to peer network for exchanging value. Using the LN offchain trxs using bitcoin to fuel the wallets completely negates the whole concept and purpose of bitcoin. I'm still completely confused why this is a solution, to me it's just a centralized way to move bitcoin or any other form of value.

[figmentofmyass]

So what's the point of bitcoin if all your trxs are done offchain? You could fund your LN wallet or whatever they call it with any form of value such as Dogecoin or fiat.

bitcoin is the settlement layer. when you eventually want to exit LN with real money, you settle to the bitcoin blockchain. it's also used to arbitrate disputes between LN channel participants---if one participant is dishonest, the other can publish the true channel state to the blockchain.

you could definitely use dogecoin with LN, assuming dogecoin developers get on top of interoperability. what's wrong with that? the point of LN is to retain trustlessness, so introducing fiat tokens doesn't make sense.

Aside from bitcoin being the first crypto, what is the advantage in using it with LN vs some other form of electronic value?
What makes bitcoin unique is that is a decentralized peer to peer network for exchanging value. Using the LN offchain trxs using bitcoin to fuel the wallets completely negates the whole concept and purpose of bitcoin. I'm still completely confused why this is a solution, to me it's just a centralized way to move bitcoin or any other form of value.

here's another way to look at it: which altcoins won't run into the same scalability problems? many of them are either less scalable, and the rest are just copycats of bitcoin or ethereum. your criticism is more about decentralization itself than about bitcoin.

the fact is that security via POW is expensive and decentralization is inefficient. but there are no other ways to achieve trustlessness. one approach is to use the blockchain as a settlement layer rather than the end-all-be-all, allowing exponential scale without the limitations of the linearly scaling blockchain.

there are other approaches to exponential scaling, like sharding, but those are too controversial for bitcoin. it's not gonna happen.

[WinslowIII]

So what's the point of bitcoin if all your trxs are done offchain? You could fund your LN wallet or whatever they call it with any form of value such as Dogecoin or fiat.

bitcoin is the settlement layer. when you eventually want to exit LN with real money, you settle to the bitcoin blockchain. it's also used to arbitrate disputes between LN channel participants---if one participant is dishonest, the other can publish the true channel state to the blockchain.

This was my initial point, then I was told some hogwash about the LN being used indefinitely - like you never really need to settle. As you just said, if you want to close the trxs for real money you need to settle onchain. So, retailers need to settle each trx after it happens, and typical one time peer to peer trxs need to settle after each trx - why? BECAUSE REAL MONEY NEEDS TO BE TRANSFERRED.
I hate when someone is so stupid they don't even understand my point, then try to spin it to some total bs. That idiot who didn't even understand my point actually had the nerve to call me thick! lmfao. Thanks for confirming my original comment that the LN is useless for most bitcoin transactions between peers and retailers/customers. Totally. Useless.
For those situations where ongoing trxs occur between parties, using the LN offchain is losing the decentralized unchangeable ledger that bitcoin provides, which is the whole fucking point behind it. The LN is not a solution to the scalability problem.