BCH 'flips' with BTC

Both BTC and BCH are fucking shit and hardly coins people should root for, it's just that BTC winning out means money doesn't evacuate the market from uncertainty. Honestly the one good thing about a Crypto Winter 2.0 scenario is that there's real potential for a better alt to take BTC's spot as king

>normies are rational
Your model of reality seems a bit unrealistic.

Controlled by a mining cartel is decentralized?

Good, but it won't be a "crypto winter". It will mainly affect BTC and BCH. The kind of person that can't distinguish between BTC/BCH and crypto in general would never have done anything else than park it in BTC anyway.

This is the best time to shed the BCH/BTC dinosaur duo.

>This is the best time to shed the BCH/BTC dinosaur duo.

I'd honestly be okay with that

JewCoin and ChinkCoin will both live on in their respective spheres of influence.

Another thing to consider for all the people who fancy themselves high value financial professionals, and see the most valuable thing about BTC as the combined result of all of the valuations that all of those intelligent and forward thinking people with vision represented by the actual content of the ledger.

Doesn't this darwinian view, that we earned what we did because we were able to take it, extend to this sphere also? Where those who are not aware of the quicksand they were standing on with regards to the old ledger simply lost out at massive cost to the gains of those who understood it all along?

And doesn't that make the resulting ledger even stronger from an allocation of intelligent value perspective?

It seems to me this is darwinism playing out, assuming that the narrative actually holds, which I completely grant is still up in the air.

It is when you are a payed shill/paying bagholder.

And yet another thing to consider on the front of the value of that ledger for the people who are instead taking the opposite view, that the stakeholders don't matter and the technology is all that is important, and therefore XMR ZEC ZCL DASH etc are simply better bets in this sphere than either of the previous thousand gorillas who split in two and are now proceeding to beat each other about the head, potentially until death.

There is no reason the valuable ledger contained within could not be forked to use the exact same technology as those coins, providing the ten thousand pound super gorilla with not just the best technology, heaviest investment in terms of both capital and energy in proof of work to attack, but also the value of the information contained in that ledger once again being mutated and selected for as forks happen and are rationally evaluated based on their merits.

If BCH wins, it seems the model was right all along and this is just another validation of it.

If it doesn't, then the model was going to die eventually anyway and we'd have to deal with whatever plans those who attained control of it were intending to use it for anyway.

Bitcoin is decentralised, beecash is completely centralised.
The only thing the two coins share is the 21 millions supply cap, and nothing more.

As long as bitcoin don't adopt a bigger blocksize than 1mb, it'll be the safe bet.
I'm not talking about the mere price manipulation centralisation brings with it, the jews and chinks behind beecash could for example change any of the fundamentals at a moment's notice, like for example removing the 21 million cap, having >1gb blocksize, printing coins out of nowhere...
Bitcoin is berated because it "doesn't change its technology" it's "slow to change" it "won't change", but that's exactly why you can trust it.

The technology is irrelevant, only the fundamentals matter.
21 million supply cap, scarcity.
1mb blocksize, decentralisation.
That's basically the essence of bitcoin. Change one of these two, and it's over.

Burn it all down and start over. For better crypto and because I'm greedy and want the equivalent of $10 BTC

That's how it goes OP

"Decentralised" is being used as a weasel word here. So let's quantify down what it would actually take in order to control either of the forks in question;

Bitcoin Cash) You would need to be able to generate 51% more proof of work than all of the combined investment presently in the infrastructure of the system

Bitcoin) You would need to co-opt the github repository, assume political control of the bitcoin core development team, and the involved media channels.

Which strikes you as having a more plausible and readily executable attack surface?

As for making changes to the rules of the system that were indeed demonstrably ridiculous, for example 10x'ing the supply cap or something of this nature, my hypothesis of the darwinian process of fork selection would work *against* that scenario just as well as it works *for* this one. Because the stakeholders would simply revolt and crash the value of that fork into the ground right from the outset, seeing it for the idiocy it is. And that's even assuming that it could get enough proof of work to even back the *attempt* at a fork, which there is no reason to believe because of the former.

BTC is the centralized coin with one company working on it for their own profits, censoring and banning users who talk about BCH.

While BCH is truly the decentralized coin with five individual development teams heavily vested in making BCH the superior coin, and anyone can contribute.

If you're talking about fundamentals, then BCH is king. BTC has none, and many of the original core developers have actually left BTC because of the Blockstream takeover including Gavin Andressen the original person who Satoshi Nakamoto gave the project to, and Gavin fully supports BCH.

If you want to see a community working together to make it the best coin, check out r/btc

There are lots of projects, new exchanges, news, and so on being added to improve BCH.

BCH toppled Ethereum
BCH Destroyed Bitcoin's volume
BCH made every altcoin bleed

It showed its face and potential here, BCH is truly the king of all the coins.

then buy shitcoins, literally the same confidence we had when buying $10 BTC

FUCKING DUMB OP. THE PEOPLE AT 1000 DOLLARS ARENT GOING TO SELL, IT'S ALREADY BEEN PRICE IN FAGGOT.

People use bch instead of inflationary dollars in the economy presenting a real value proposition unlike btcs speculative exponential trend trading

U w0t

>People use bch instead of inflationary dollars

This is not how things work user, if you think otherwise i can confirm you are deeply deluded. I want you to make it too, so please snap out of it.

All shitcoins are too close to BTC for me to feel comfortable buying them in hopes of them taking BTC's place. We need a game changer in crypto. IOTA's a possibility, but I don't trust the devs to not fuck up somewhere along the line

it will happen and it's the only reason bitcoin was not a bubble, but now it doesn't have that application because of an arbitrary block size it is completely overvalued.

why did you buy crypto because muh digital gold? bitcoin is a stupid investment as a store of value when it relies on technology, gold relies on physics

bitcoin cash is a far superior money to fiat and gold

They don't need to take its place for you to profit they just need to moon. Most likely you lose but only literal retards could have actually expected a 10k BTC back then, when I finally bought I considered the money gone and even today I still do.

>bitcoin cash is a far superior money to fiat and gold

And there are a fuckton of alts that are superior to BCH

You're talking about hypotheticals and politics, i am talking about facts and fundamentals.
Beecash is centralised in its very software due to the huge blocksize.
Bitcoin, anyone can be a node.
Those are not OPINIONS, they are FACTS.

Please, talk about fundamentals you nigger.
And ACTUALLY talk about them, no purple prose that goes nowhere and say nothing, you pilpuling kike.

Oh, you're one of those guys. Understood. Proceed. A man has to make his living after all.

Nobody wants to spend something they expect to increase in value

crypto technology is not patentable bitcoin cash will continue to evolve through market consensus. The only real problem left is fungibility

The difference between bch and alts is it's the third highest market cap soon to be the largest, that means most people want bch to do well because they're heavily invested

Oh please, with asteroid mining around the corner, gold is a good store of value ?
Can you nigger do anything but live in the present, are you incapable of projecting in the fucking future ?
The only way for gold to survive as its traditional store of value is for a global thermonuclear war to basically reset technological progress. ( and if THAT happen, you have bigger problems than the value of your investment, especially since you're a YOLOing nigger and probably don't have an autarcic bunker already built kek )

so you would rather keep all wealth in fiat because it incentivizes you to spend?
there is a problem with deflationary money; when you have deflation you can't access denominations of currency small enough to justify spending but it does not apply to crypto because crypto is infinitely divisible. Deflation is also a problem for governments because it stops mindless consumer spending, but that's exactly what we want.

gold is a store of value because it's properties do not change with time (it's chemically inert) and supply is constant across the universe. Asteroid mining, pulling gold out of the sea and sub mantle mining are all possible but only when the scarcity of gold stops them being cost prohibitive. The growth of gold supply remains at around 3% throughout history regardless of technological advancement.

This is answer is more than you deserve trying to argue gold is not a store of value but it the reason I have invested in crypto is because it is the first technology that can make gold redundant. The store of value proposition needs to come from global adoption as money not just because that's cores last ditch marketing idea

>we don't live on a flat earth
>mfw when the sun emits an emp and doesn't just wipe out electronics one side of the earth, b/c there is only one side, thus destroying the blockchains.
Get your asteroid mining bologna out of the deli, it stinks homez.

>soon to be the largest

I really doubt that

>>Crypto Winter 2.0 begins
I wouldn't mind being able to buy bitcoin for under $1k again.

feb 2018

This isn't about what I would prefer, just that muh digital gold is all it will be, there is no incentive to spend and in fact it is the exact opposite and the incentive is to hoard. In contrast to for example ETH or similar there is no actual necessity to spend BTC, we do right now have the black market thing and gambling, maybe those keep transactions ticking over with the acceptance scale I don't know, privacy coins are the right tool for the job there though.

Last weekend made my butt clench so tight my poo became a diamond

You guys need to stop pushing back the flippening. First it was the DDA, then it was Nov 24th, and now it's apparently next year

then we agree to disagree that store of value for bitcoin comes from people having confidence that they will be able to exchange it for goods and services in the future

i'm obviously speculating. I do know that bch is currently running faster than btc even with only 19% of the hashrate fork.lol/pow/hashrate
fork.lol/pow/speed

how long do you think miners will continue to mine btc at a loss?

>how long do you think miners will continue to mine btc at a loss?

Difficulty has been flipping between the two for days and it'll probably continue

>btc will fall to sub 1k levels and be referred to as bitcoin legacy BTL. the market will be unaffected and old bitcoin will fade into nothingness like a fart in the wind desu
Even Ver and Jihan have said that even if BCH surpasses BTC, BTC should still be called bitcoin with BCH being called bitcoin cash.

btc is less profitable in th 1h, 6h and 7day average

how can you justify holding btc (even if you think bch is shit) when hashpower could permanently leave the chain?

are there people who still think bch is a thing?

Yes, there are people who live in reality and don't pretend that things don't exist.

>when hashpower could permanently leave the chain?

Because you're saying things that aren't absolutes like they are. Shit supposed death spiral scenario isn't even happening now since transactions have been getting cleared rather nicely now

lol, sorry you all bought the top on bcash, but you have to be a literal child to think billions are just going to move over to an alt that's even worse than bitcoin instead of anything that's learned the lessons bitcoin's had to deal with.

most investors are clearly retarded, judging by the pumping in bcash, but the real money isn't going to hands itself over to some shitty chinese bitcoin clone. it's either bitcoin, or something completely new, like ethereum.

this is legit

>newfags don't matter.
Are you retarded? BTC marketcap before BCH forked was a third of what it is now. Newfags matter more than anyone by far.

Bitcoin Cash is TRASH

BITCOIN WILL HAVE CME FUTURES AND PRICE WILL SKYROCKET

BITCOIN CASH HAS NOTHING

and everyone talking about a "death spiral" is conveniently forgetting that the bcash alt completely broke proof of work difficulty just so it could survive.

by the same logic bcash should never exist today, the only reason it's here is because the guy who cloned it decided to categorically go against satoshi's design to force it into existence.

the whole thing with a chain death spiral is you have to get out before it starts because you can't afterwards. What hashrate distribution, mining profitability averages would make you worried then if it's not the current stats

Lol "Bitcoin cash is centralized"

What a joke. Tell me all about the federated side chains I'll need to use to send a bitcoin transaction, how that'll totally be not controlled by a few financial companies and how there's no need to trust those companies and how companies can't be targeted by the government.

if core had just increased the blocksize as satoshi laid out it wouldn't of been necessary to commit a contentious hard fork. I would never prefer bitcoin cash ove btc with a blocksize increase an no segwit. The inflation and daa that the contentious hard fork caused is well worth the fact that bitcoin still exists

Oh yeah for sure, accepting it isn't the restriction and in a way contributes to the problem, it's people actually wanting to let go of it that is inhibited by the deflation and the longer it goes up and cements confidence the more of a problem this becomes. I call it a problem but it isn't really, just it's good for hoarding bad for spending.

If you could be confident it was going to be +50% in a years time you wouldn't want to spend it, well you and I might want to risk it on lucrative moon missions but it mostly ends up trickling into the cold coffers of those who can just afford to hodl forever.

If BTC was the ONLY coin that was accepted it's different, it forces people to spend which it kind of the situation we have / have had, the receiving end would still expected to just fucken hoard though.

I just don't agree with the spending angle on BCH, it might allow for smoother spending but ends up being hoarded anyway by design

You act like there isn't a 1 to 1 air drop of bch for every btc so how is anyone getting screwed?? You mean the dumbasses that sold there BCH gets screwed. If anything this is a blessing we are in a time where Blockstream literally is trying to fuck over bitcoin and There is a cheaper forked version of the same coin that is not congested to fuck because it fixes the problem. blockstream is solving nothing and they pushing everyone off chain to make money when they could upgrade blocksize like the white paper states and transact with freedom not congestion and increasingly high fees its a peer to peer electronic cash system not a store of value

...

>You act like there isn't a 1 to 1 air drop of bch for every btc so how is anyone getting screwed??

Anyone that bought BCH after July 31st doesn't have BCH. They just have BTC. The people who bought BTC at $2.8k and brought it up to damned near $8k per. That's a lot of money that only has BTC

the problem I have with this is increase in value is dependent on people wanting it to use it, you can't just decree something will continue to go up in value; that's the definition of a ponzi scheme.

you're saying btc will continue to go up because people will think it will continue to go up and buy in making it continue to go up

a limited supply of btc does not make it valuable (there's a limited supply of my shit but no ones buying). BTC currently has no use case that is competitive with bch.
slower transactions and higher fees do not improve the store of value properties of btc relative to bch they make them less

cointelegraph.com/news/cme-clearing-member-to-regulator-bitcoin-futures-impossible

BTC is garbage, BCH is the future

I told you cucks that CME shit was just more price-baiting by kikestream. BTC is going down the gurgler soon.

Time will tell which chain will win.
The true question is IF btc will remain dominant will you remain in the minor cash chain based on your petty ideologies?

they should've understood what bitcoin is, it's not the name it's the synthesis of game theory, economics, cryptography and computer code outlined in the whitepaper.

What does one anonymous member asking them to not go with BTC have to do with anything? There's still large support for it overall and we've seen no actual signs they're gonna drop it

>they should've understood what bitcoin is

Well that doesn't really matter. They're gonna see they lost money because of a fork and they'll drop out of the space for a while. It doesn't matter what the logical reasoning actually is

>that's the definition of a ponzi scheme.

No that's not the definition of a Ponzi scheme. You're retarded. A Ponzi scheme is where someone promises an investor incredibly good returns in a short period. The investor puts in their basis. The investor then receives the promised profit from other investors that have similarly been promised future returns. This encourages them to make larger investments, which go to pay off the other investors and make them pay more. Eventually this becomes unsustainable and the leader takes all the money accumulated and leaves town.

You are correct that BTC currently has no use case that Bitcoin cash doesn't already have. A coin that's expensive to transact and actually use and can only be traded on exchanges is like a dead man walking. Money will probably pour into btc for a while. But it'll eventually collapse.

A bitcoin crash will just confirm Ripple and Stellar are the future.

Fast, centralized and thus controllable, corporate backed.

I believe that's what btc is now that it's use case "peer to peer electronic cash" is no longer feasible. It's just a way of transfering wealth to those who get out early at the top.

The tinfoil hatter in me thinks the chinese government engineered core as a false flag so that they could accumulate bch through their control of jihan wus assets. This not mean I think china can control bch

Then they're just as idiotic as people who got screwed on a horseshoe venture at the genesis of the model T and won't buy ford shares out of spite.

It's going to be far easier for oppressive governments to attack off chain transactions that onchain ones. Target those who possess sidechain access a d destroy them and their records. Poof.

Nigger in an average gold asteroid there is more gold than all fucking gold mined for all of fucking History, 3%/year ? More like 20000%/year it'll be !
You know how retard are spouting that gold is better than bitcoin as a store of value since it have practical uses ? Yeah, before the end of the century those practical uses will be all it's used for, much like how aluminium ended up at to point out a precedent ( which is great, gold is useful shit and it becoming as ubiquitous as aluminium would be awesome ).

Meanwhile, there can only be 21 million bitcoin, only 84 millions LTC and so on.
Crypto is a new fucking paradigm, and bitcoin is the king of that paradigm, both due to brand power and fundamentals ( others coins have as good/better fundamentals, but branding is everything with the retarded masses and the ones seeking to exploit said masses like basically all of Veeky Forums )

people who did this do not have significant amounts of money.

Additionally can you imagine the rally when it is clear that bch was bitcoin all along and is now capable of real world everyday transactions

Thank you user, thank you.

which is the same reason the stakeholders presently pushing the BCH side of the great crypto civil war will never accept them.

and if that side wins, they too will die.

and if it doesn't, why would they have any traction on BTC?

>capable of real world everyday transactions

until the blocks fill up. then what?

Then you raise the blocksize and further lower the decentralisation, duh.

oooh... my bad

Can't wait for those 1GB blocks stored on one giant server in china - all this multiple node stuff is very inefficient!

Although I do hope monero lasts as a community favorite. I think the end of bitcoin would drag it down along with them.

Ethereum with its smart scandals is a bit tainted. So I dont think they would make it.

the industrial utility of gold has nothing to do with its use as money in all civilizations. Gold is money because it's purchasing power does not change with time, it is the value datum. There is always demand for gold because it is the ultimate store of excess labor

the increase in supply of gold by asteroid mining is offset by the extreme cost of conducting the operation.

you scale on chain until it reaches the limit imposed by moores law balancing spam, mining centralization, node centralizatoin, transaction capacity. That limit is certainly not 1, 2 or 8mb and satoshi was fully confidant in bitcoin scaling to visas transaction capacity on chain.

I don't know what the limit is but it may exceed what will ever be necessary in transaction capacity, if so you could look at second layer solutions which are still possible without segwit.

then ETH wins

their $100 will be fine, it'll serve as a lesson to actually research and keep up with things

Corefags hate graphene look at them all fail to mention it.

BCH being easier to mine actually decreases its value. Thats it. Buy BTC unless you have inside info about BCH pumps.

>crypto winter is a bad thing
>scaring normies off to give us all more time to accumulate is a bad thing
>buying low is a bad thing

so if i make bitcoin as hard as possible to mine it will be worth more?

this mental gymnastics is advanced

I honestly think that people put the two bitcoins in the same basket. If bitcoin cash wins both will tank. And BTC cant survive in its current form.

But the technology is still useful and both Ripple and Stellar present themselves as secure partnerships to businesses who need to adopt cryptocurrencies. So their case is different. They dont rely on constantly new investors.

>so if i make bitcoin as hard as possible to mine it will be worth more?

Uhh yeah because mining gets you coins literally for free. Do you even economics?

that's true, but the chinese government knows they cannot stop bitcoin so they'd like to have as much as they can

>free
cost of mining 1% of btc hashrate is 21,000,000usd

mining is what makes transacting on a blockchain possible if you make that as hard as possible no one will use it because the fees will be too expensive and the confirmations will take too long

>the confirmations will take too long

Muh confirmation speed! Muh fees! Bitcoin is literally free to trade if you use free sites.

If your time is free perhaps.

No, there's an equilibrium point. Miners look at the market and make judgements based on the likely present and future profitability of mining, if the proof of work hardware is likely to be profitable, they buy and deploy it pushing the proof of work supply up. If not, they don't, keeping it stable or reducing it in cases of supply glut.

what are you disagreeing with mining is free? that mining is what confirms transactions?