Retards think bitcoin futures being listed on the CME is a good thing

Yes, just like the $4.7billion gambled on the superb owl affected the final score

To be fair, crypto is a unregulated market and thus Jew tricks will in full effect.

>Short futures
>Dump a lot of pre owned Bitcoin.

I mean look what happened last weekend.

OP Can you imagine if the futures are listed, then some powerful guy who invested wants the price to go down? They literally just have to launch an investigation against Bitfinex's Tether scandal and poof to the gutter BTC goes.

This is where AML Bitcoin will come into play. Look it up.

That's actually alright by me: they can't print off more BTC so it's a trade they can only max out on once

The problem with that is that they have to have the people believe they adopted it themselves.

Once it gets adopted globally, then they will come in seize it and change it. They can't simply be like accept our centralized Jew currency, they have to backdoor it in.

>mfw institutional money will absolutely control the price of btc and fuck everyone in the ass
true. you're missing the important point that it needs to get fully levered first though which implies far higher prices

>the important point that it needs to get fully levered first though which implies far higher prices
What are you even talking about brainlet? Its cash settled and they are only betting on the price. Do you even understand how this works? Or do you only know how to HODL lmao.

How futures can affect btc price:
1. Open 100MM long on futures
2. Only spend 10MM to pump real btc
3. Close long & open 200MM short
4. Dump all btc as violently as possible

in a world where game theory didn't apply the fact that they were cash settled might matter. I sincerely hope you're shorting btc

fucking this

>there are 16 million BTC out there already
>no matter how much the elites buy, it just makes current holders richer
>they can't change the protocol and there is 21 million max
>somehow this is a bad thing

what difference does it make if someone with 100 billion dollars to fuck with bitcoin comes along and does it? imagine ver on steroids

Doesn't change the overall physical facts.

do you think 100 billion is big for wall street? did u see the fomo and panic selling when bcash gang attacked btc?

This.

Bitcoin is not like fiat where they can print at wild, or like gold where the supply is (((unknown))).

For once we will become rich while jews try to fuck shit up. Just buy any further dips.

A nice little panic, eh. I dare say there'll be some weak holders to shake out in the early days

"Panic selling" is idiots allocating their BTC to smarter people that get richer, naturally, as a matter of course.

since most people are emotional traders where do you think the majority of btc will end up?

in my pocket
:^)

and then who the fuck do you think will be accumulating all the bitcoin meanwhile shaking out retail holders

you retards with your 5 btc aren't shit compared to what's about to happen

>who will be
I will be.

In the wallets of rich BTC holders that will continue getting richer, aka people like me.

If you don't value your BTC enough and you sell every dip, you don't deserve to hold it.

Not everyone here is poor. But all you need is a strong hand, but then again that is why you are poor, you don't.

People who accumulate but don't sell drive the price up. People who buy and short like says will have to buy ever more driving the price ever higher in order to make a difference.

Sounds like good news to me!

>easily transactable

lol

Go to bed, Roger.

Why should a future world currency be so easy to cripple from some casual attackers?

>at ATH
>"crippled"
One of your assumptions is wrong

That you think that has anything to do with a permafrost chain tells me all I need to know about you user.

By the way, I figured out the jew jitsu defense on this one too and I'm on that side of the trade too. So thanks for money on both sides.

Yeah, the ability to send transactions has been totally crippled by some casual group of attackers. That's completely umacceptable vulnerability for a potential world currency.

What happens when a major world government decides it doesn't like Bitcoin then and can launch a real attack?

>What happens when a major world government ... launch a real attack?
It fails, and we laugh

Oh and for anyone who's watching here's how it works.

Corecucks amend their bids once every 2016 blocks
Real bitcoin now amends its bids once every block.

Inevitable conclusion in natural market state; Bitcoin steals hashrate from corecucks until corecuck chain is permafrost.

Corecuck defense;
Pump massive amounts of fiat into the BTC in order to equalise mining profitability by making the bid in fiat match the BCH bid.

Exploit to corecuck defense;

Get into BTC, wait until the chain starts getting icy and they've run out of wallstreetbux to pump, dump it for BCH when BCH starts to moon. Watch the fucking chaos.

Even if they never run out of money, they have to keep shovelling it at you on the BTC side just to avoid permafrost chain, so either way you win. It's just a question of do they lose too?

Enjoy.

>potential world currency
>cant even handle transactions made by NEET speculators
>muh 1mb blocks

But this small attack has already succeeded in raising transaction fees to $10-$20+ and stopping transactions up for days to weeks. Throw more money at it and you can effectively stop the blockchain from handling nearly all actual transactions.

all of us here are sheep. none of us can trade without emotion unless you bought back before 2011. if any of you were wolves youd be working on wall street.

Depends on your definition of success. While you're right that they've forced up the value of transaction fees with spam, all that's happened is that BTC has moved up the value chain from currency to Store of Value leaving plenty of room for BCH in the ceded territory. Bitcoin has successfully adapted to the attack emerging with two stronger candidates.

BCH: can't spam for very long. BTC: not held by anyone who cares about buying a $1 coffee.

the people who are going to get fucked the most are alt holders, BTC's constant fluctuations are going gonna leave them all dead in the water.

Why the fuck would you want to live in America and work for wall street hacks?

You know what the purpose of 2001 attacks really were, right? Destroy the actual genuine financial expertise in the american marketplace and capitalise on the inevitable economic failures that follow from the removal of that human capital.

fucking burgers man.

>BCH never moons unless something happens to BTC.
>BCH has to hard fork DAA to gain hashrate by minting more coin to pay miners
>BCH is inflated (thanks to the DAA) to the point that miners sell it as soon as possible because they know it will naturally loses value vs BTC, sans whales
>People who do want fast transactions go to LTC or ETH
BCH is the one in a permafrost chain, my friend

I'm not touching BTC until wall street has control over it so then I can fuck them over easy.

It's harder to trade agaisnt you novices because you play it so straight forward and I I'm on a deeper yomi level.

Statistically, miners sell everything. That is the action that is in their rational self interest. The ones that want to speculate on value of the underlying assets then on top of that may make a play by buying the assets that they actually believe in, just like we do, but mining a currency they believe in at a loss instead of mining a more profitable one they don't, selling it, and buying the one they do believe in is just economically irrational.

If you understood mining, you would understand this.

Meanwhile BCH maintains a block time of more or less ten minutes, with a transaction pool so tiny it could be done with blocks far, far slower than that.

Permafrost chain on the BTC side isn't some catchy marketing name, it's an actual description of the end state of the equilibrium.

No more transactions into or out of the ledger.

Period.

what happens when a significant portion of btc is lost over time due to human error?

Doesn't matter. Bitcoin is infinitely divisible.

Here's a mindblower- if only one total bitcoin was left in the world everything could run just fine. Units are arbitrary

>Statistically, miners sell everything.
You don't seem to know what the word "Statistically" means.

If BCH really does start becoming a threat to BTC, Core will eventually capitulate and permit a hard fork to fix the scaling issues
But for now, fork.lol/reward/inflation BCH is inflationland

>but but but

They are lossing money. Also what do you think are all these hardfork attempts? This is the government already attacking. Satoshi disappeared when Gavin visited the CIA. He is the biggest faggot, sellout of them all, closely followed by Hearn and Garzik, which went to work for the banks.

In any case, second layer solutions will allow for fast cheap transactions without fucking up people that have real money on this (6 figures and above) and enjoy having a censorship resistant digital gold.

Gold & Silver post-2008

I hope they don't but suspect they will

No, not everyone is a cuck, fuck off.
tard

If you understood the game theory behind Bitcoin, you wouldn't be supporting a shitfork, irrespective of the scammer that's pitching it.

but it wouldn't run just fine if it was owned by one entity and it cant accommodate for deflation without creating more bitcoin.

> core will fork to do what it should have done all along!

Great. Then we can continue united. Until then, they can die.

> Scaling of BCH since latest DAA hard fork exactly in line with BTC!

Ok.

And why would one entity own it? are you retarded.

How do you identify what is a shitfork? By what measure do you mathematically verify the chain *you* think is the correct one, actually is? Proof of neckbeard and github repository? muh silicon valley bitcoin user's group?

Skin in the game or gtfo. Proof of work or die.

>skin in the game
Exactly. Holders have the most power in bitcoin.

You are overrating the power of decision of miners. Miners follow incentives which are derived by holders actions, they have a minimal impact of decision on matters such as hardfork, believe it or not.

Right. Your mistake is in thinking that miners and holders are absolutely necessarily different people. And that the rewards miners get from mining whatever is most profitable, they won't hold in whatever they think is most valuable, and whatever they think is most valuable won't be influenced by their understanding of the architecture of the system and the entire purpose of proof of work.

And if you don't believe that, you should just sell all your POW coins and go find a POS coin to back. And maybe try convince me while you're at it because if POS could actually be made to work that might change something. But it can't, so you won't.

Corecucks have been financing miners this entire war, and even now shovelling wallstreetbux hand over fist at them and lowering the temperature of their own chain, they still don't seem to understand that and just keep doing it.

because its plausible in the stupid hypothetical you brought up.

As much as I want to see the corecucks garggle their own shit, they have a massive supply of funds in the form of unlimited bitfinex tethers.

Once a whistleblower comes along or the SEC wakes up, this fucking tether scam will be blown apart and we'll see 3 digit BTC in a matter days.

Just in time for the futures to stuff massive BTC longs

Right. Which is the beauty of the current system, where those fiat funds are being shredded fighting *an algorithm*.

They literally cannot win. All they can do is vary how fast they hand over their cash.

>Miners decide

No, they do not. The miners make some minor decisions in BTC, but major decisions such as block forks are not at their disposition alone, and this for excellent reasons you'll readily understand if you stop and think about it.

There are two specific methods to control miners on this matter, which will make the scamcoin Gavin is trying to replace everyone's BTC with only replace some people's BTC. The first and most obvious is that irrespective of what miners mine, each single full node will reject illegal blocks. This is a fact. If all the miners out there suddenly quit Bitcon and go mine Keiser's Aurora scamcoin instead, from the perspective of the BTC network hash rate simply dropped and that's all. There's absolutely no difference between Keiser's scamcoin and Gavin's scamcoin as far as the network is concerned. As far as anyone will be able to perceive, miners simply left.

The second and perhaps not as obvious has nevertheless been discussed at length on multiple occasions:

Whoever has enough money to matter is likely to pick one chain for whatever reason, since fork means BTC can be spent independently on either chain he will sell his BTC on one and perhaps buy on the other. As a result prices will rapidly diverge, panicking the mass of users, and the fork is economically resolved.

The situation here is aggravated by the fact that the fork proposed is not simply nondeterministic behaviour, and so the holdings on the two chains aren't notionally equivalent. Instead, all the holdings on the BTC chain are accepted as valid on both BTC and Gavincoin, but holdings on Gavincoin are rejected by BTC. Consequently, everyone involved with the fork is writing options to everyone in BTC, free of charge. That they have no ready way to finance these should be obvious, and consequently the grim prospects of the Gavin side of the fork should be just as obvious. At least, to people who understand economy to any degree.

yeah totally because if btc was owned by one entity the end state of capitalism would be achieved and non owners would have to do everything the big HODLR told them to do if they wanted to receive their wage (i.e. absolute bare minimum to sustain peak efficient work). it's not like people would voluntarily develop alternate solutions well in advance of a single entity owning all bitcoin.

> Miners decide, no they do not.

Once again, right. You just don't appear to grasp that miners and stakeholders can be the same people. And what is in the interests of a miner stakeholder? Run the best blockchain. The best blockchain is absolutely not the one miles under permafrost.

> The first and most obvious is that irrespective of what miners mine, each single full node will reject illegal blocks. This is a fact.

"Illegal blocks" from one side of the hard fork are not "Illegal blocks" on the other side of the hard fork. And vice versa.

So it is a fact, but it supports both sides of the fork exactly equally.

> If all the miners out there suddenly quit Bitcon and go mine Keiser's Aurora scamcoin instead, from the perspective of the BTC network hash rate simply dropped and that's all.

This is false. If all the miners out there suddenly quit corecuck chain and go mine something else, the transaction throughput of the corecuck chain permanently drops to zero because of the difficulty adjustment algorithm.

> As far as anyone will be able to perceive, miners simply left.

At which point, the chain which had previously been maintained by them froze and nobody was able to transact.

> Whoever has enough money to matter is likely to pick one chain for whatever reason, since fork means BTC can be spent independently on either chain he will sell his BTC on one and perhaps buy on the other. As a result prices will rapidly diverge, panicking the mass of users, and the fork is economically resolved.

Once again correct. So the question then becomes; which side is actually the more valuable of the fork? That is indeed currently being resolved.

> At least, to people who understand economy to any degree.

Unless they're totally wrong about the underlying nature of the product upon which they're speculating, and are about to buy a permafrost swimming pool.

relevant great article from a day or two ago:

cointelegraph.com/news/cme-groups-regulated-futures-market-may-enable-retail-giants-to-accept-bitcoin

my point was that btc at its current point is comparable to the gold standard it will have to adjust to make up for its long term deflation or be replaced by a better coin.

>Once again, right. You just don't appear to grasp that miners and stakeholders can be the same people. And what is in the interests of a miner stakeholder? Run the best blockchain. The best blockchain is absolutely not the one miles under permafrost.

Once again, miners are not the biggest stakeholders, they are just chinks staking ASICs. They sell most of their BTC for CNY.

>"Illegal blocks" from one side of the hard fork are not "Illegal blocks" on the other side of the hard fork. And vice versa.

And the biggest stakeholders will force miners to come back into the legacy chain.

>Once again correct. So the question then becomes; which side is actually the more valuable of the fork? That is indeed currently being resolved.

It is already solved. The biggest stakeholders don't support the fork. You can keep drinking Ver's koolaid if that makes you sleep at night.

>>mfw institutional money will absolutely control the price of btc and fuck everyone in the ass

cme future are fucking fantastic thing for btc, ofcourse you must have future for digital gold

>the govt wants to get rid of it man
they already subverted it

> Once again, miners are not the biggest stakeholders, they are just chinks staking ASICs. They sell most of their BTC for CNY.

Which the permafrost attack and BCH DAA actually relies upon in order to operate.

> And the biggest stakeholders will force miners to come back into the legacy chain.

Which is them handing money hand over fist to buy soldiers for their enemy, because recall who actually owns the network. The harder they divest themselves of their stake to keep corecuck chain liquid, the easier they make it for the other side of the fork to freeze that chain with the DAA.

> It is already solved. The biggest stakeholders don't support the fork. You can keep drinking Ver's koolaid if that makes you sleep at night.

Dumb money with 10x isn't a match for smart money with 1x.

And even if it is in this case, I'd have to say thank you for the massive gains you're going to hand to people that understand what you must do in order to keep the corecuck chain unfrozen. All we have to do is hold BTC until we see it start to freeze up, knowing you have to pump the price to stop that from happening. As soon as it does start to freeze up, we dump it and move over to the other side, which has 10x less encumbrance to perform the same actually useful work.

But if you want to ignore all that and play the wog patrician... you go right ahead.

>easily transactable

the most damage they can do is pump it with fiat then pull out and the price drops. they can keep doing this but it wont affect anything except the price of bitcoin relative to fiat.

this method of fuckery relies heavily on people try to also play the market like they are. it has zero effect on people holding. thats why we try to fucking tell you morons to HODL. when you get shaken out or scared and sell to minimise losses youre doing exactly what )))(((((THEY"" want you to fucking do.

/facepalm

What are you expecting? Price plummets?
Not with all that baggage. CME has clients.
If anything they provide a support for the price.