Anyone feeling like this is the time to buy BCH?

Good news for you user. Shitcoin trash isn't Bitcoin and will never be Bitcoin.

but the market does give a fuck because it is named bitcoin cash, lol

im not buying bch. disclaimer.

Yeah but it did that whole forking thing back in july before they added segwit so yeah it kinda is little guy

for everyone with the whole "muh better technology coin XMR ZEC DASH LTC" meme, keep in mind that cryptos are tanks, and their hashpower is their armour. BCH could adopt any of the technological innovations from any of the other chains in terms of fungibility and anonymity enhancements whilst retaining it's insanely thick armour and battle tested valuable ledger information which is the net result of the free market financial expertise of the past eight years since smart money figured out what was going on, but the same does not apply in reverse at all.

No other crypto comes anywhere near the armour of SHA256 mining. The economic outlay necessary to attack SHA256 coin is orders of magnitude greater than the rest.

For everyone who jumps to the conclusion "So BTC will win then", keep in mind that right now BTC could rip out the entire mining part of the system and lose absolutely nothing in terms of consensus from miners. At which point it would be a shitty poorly executed proof of stake coin. BTC is a tank who wants to pay for its armour in monopoly money and thinks prayer will be enough to protect it on the battlefield when the armour vendor decides to sell to the opposition instead.

BCH is the only legitimate SHA256 POW coin with long term survival prospects, therefore it necessarily inherits the armour characteristics which this implies. Either BCH will butcher BTC directly as all the rumours are buzzing that it presently will on the 25th, or BTC will be forced to switch away from SHA256 POW purely because those stakeholders have demonstrated hostility and object to the present direction thereof.

Any way you look at it, BCH comes out on top.

I'm done hedging. All in on this bitch.

BCH is BTC that will actually scale.

#3 market cap
#2 price
#2 24hr volume

Uhoh. Looks like even your gook friend agrees with me.

uhh looks like you bought vaporware garbage from a bunch of kikes a month ago
twitter.com/adam3us/status/923309367260274688

...

Buying something should require some semblance of value proposition (other than allowing jihan to continue using asicboost).

I BOUGHT AT 0.42 AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

exactly

the reason btc always dominated the market cap is because people were most invested in it and tech from alts is not patentable meaning they can't really compete.

The entire alt market was created by the scaling debate, when people realise bch is bitcoin and they have as much bch as they did btc before the fork it's over for btc and alts

people who sold their bch don't understand how contentious hard forks are the last line of defence in bitcoins' design or were brainwashed by r/bitcoin

All this stuff about "contentios forks", how tf is BTC going to ever improve their protocol in the future?

Look how hard it was to get Segwit through, it took an incredibly long time, and they ended up breaking the NYA anyway. How on earth is Blockstream going to manage the next protocol upgrade?

You're ahead of the market bud, congrats. Bitcoin Cash is bitcoin.

I went all in back in the August lows of ~$200, sadly only had ~2k to spend. If I had 50k I would have dropped it all in BCH back then, would have quadrupled $50k instead of $2k.

I'm sitting on $10k BCH right now and I expect it to continue it's trend upward after this consolidation period ends. I think we've been sitting on the new bottom for sometime now so the next leg up shouldn't be too far off.

what's this about the 25th? did I miss something?

neither party wanted a contentious fork but it was necessary.

they argued over scaling for 2 years
agreed to a compromise of new york agreement aka segwit 2x
come 2017 core said they were going to fork twice once for segwit then again for 2mb blocks.
Anyone with a brain can see the only reason you wouldn't include both the block increase and segwit in the one fork was because you weren't planning on implementing the 2mb blocks
this forced the contentious hardfork of bitcoin cash on august first

the trade off that was necessary has been the difficulty adjustment algo and the inflation it has caused. DAA is going to make it harder to have clean contentious hardforks in the future. But contentious hardforks are only marketable if there is genuine debate over bitcoins properties

the final problem for bitcoin (bitcoin cash) is now fungibility.

buy bch up to 1400, no stop loss.

and remember, let the game come to you!

The theory goes that a combined assault will be launched on BTC, hash power will vacate the chain en masse after having pumped up the difficulty on this most recent cycle despite a profitability advantage for BCH, sending the already low capacity of the BTC chain into an indefinite chain freeze as the next 2016 blocks mined point extends further out into the future. At the same time holders of BTC that have had enough of the corestream status quo will unload en masse driving the market down and further increasing the profitability curve in favour of BCH, and the coup will be complete.

Hard fork "resolved" so to speak. Nakamoto consensus validated.

This may or may not be just a rumour, but it's not up for debate at all that A) they could do this if they wanted to and B) even if they don't, because of A BTC is going to have to shed its armour and adopt some alternative, meaning BCH will necessarily inherit it, as well as the value thereof.

Has legacy chain solved fungibility?

Seems kinda unrealistic to me. As the more hashrate BTC loses, the higher and higher fees users are going to be willing to pay to bring miners back.

bch is peer to peer electronic cash

btc has no use case. >Muh store of value
store of value comes from having confidence you will be able to spend that thing in the future the only thing propping up btc price now if people speculating it will go up, buying in and making it go up it became a bubble as soon as 2x was called off

no btc is even less fungible than bch because tumblers are way too expensive

>Believing there would be any value left for BCH to "inherit" if BTC is killed
>Failing to recognize the degree to which investor confidence in Bitcoin as a store of value would evaporate, probably forever, if some chink miners managed to take down Bitcoin in the course of pumping their asicboost altcoin.

fees are denominated in BTC. If the value of BTC crashes, fees on the BTC blockchain are less valuable, and vice versa for BCH as it rises. And it doesn't take much of a gap in terms of the prices of both assets given the current difficulty split that the fees just don't matter anyway even at the current prices, and BCH has a capacity for 8 times more on chain transactions and therefore 8 times more fees holding everything else equal purely from volume.

I don't see any way BTC gets out of this alive, sorry.

That's what I thought. Tumbling still seems like an incomplete solution though.

Not really sure if it's even possible to fix this on the current coin?

LARP'ing as if though BTC were secure despite the reality being exactly opposite because you don't want to spook dumb money and in so doing invalidating the core of your product, nakamoto consensus, would be pretty much the definition of self defeating.

Smart money should already be aware of the game theory involved and be appropriately positioned to capitalise on the obvious move, and if they're not, they're not so smart. And if they're relying on insulation from investor perceptions of dumb money why aren't they all in San Francisco real estate and vanguard index funds with all the other clueless sheep?

Yeah, except it'll take two+ weeks for the difficulty to adjust again. That's two weeks of transactions being locked out. Imagine if a currency couldn't be traded for two weeks, do you think people will stick with it?

Currency isn't worth shit if it can't be traded.

Even if we assume that BTC can maintain an altruistic 20% of the present capacity over a long period of time (optimistic but empirically validated from the last brief spurt of this scenario prior weekend), time to difficulty adjustment is 70 days and on chain throughput is cut to 20% while fees balloon to 500%.

If BCH goes for the jugular, it's flatly doomed. The only semi-reasonable alternative to this scenario is "But BCH will let it live". And in having done that, BCH would have invalidated the game theory implicit in the design of the entire system in which it operates, so I'm leaning heavily towards thinking this attack really is going to happen.

Could just adopt what the privacy coins have done or maybe wallets will have inbuilt tumblers

Look at this graph from fork.lol

Fee % of block reward. BCH has so few transactions, and zero congestion, so fees are basically nil.

BTC actually got up to 40% of USD reward as fees, at the height of the panic. If BTC price dips more severely than it did last time (which is BOUND to happen eventually, BTC ALWAYS CORRECTS), I think fee % will get even higher. Every BTC panic has been bigger than the last.

Also there is a super easy way for BTC to get out of this alive, and one that Blockstream could try at any moment. A simple fork to increase the BTC blocksize would kill BCH. Maybe. Assuming they can FUD their community into forgetting all the bollocks about blocksize they have spread for the past couple of years.

...

Coins like monero operate in a fundamentally different way, at a basic level. This would be such a huge change to Bitcoin I don't know if it'll happen.
And Monero has even bigger scalability issues going forward than Bitcoin does. Just doesn't have the tx volume to show it yet.

Forgot pic.

>BCH will let it live
miners will let btc live. They've been mining at btc at a loss since nov 13th. BCH is also already as fast as btc only sitting on around 10% of hashrate.

The death of btc is now completely dependent on the price of bch

Blockstream will not increase the blocksize under any circumstances, it kills their business plan.

yeah I agree, I don't think a solution will be impossible though.

either way its refreshing to talk about a real development issue rather than scaling nonsense

Already in this non-attack situation of the past week, BCH profitability has exceeded 190% of BTC mining on a fairly regular basis.

The situation you speculate on requires fees to make up for that in a shooting war where that profitability is going to skyrocket to a number much higher than that, whilst the price of those fees will dwindle as the BTC price dwindles.

As for the corestream bloc, I don't think they have any good will left at all. They could announce they were cloning Adriana Chechik 21 million times and sending every holder of a single BTC a personal copy for lifetime on tap blowjobs and they'd still probably just get a snarl from their competition. Don't underestimate the hostility they've cultivated from their actions, nor the damage those actions have inflicted on their negotiation position or leadership ability.

.500 here Poloniex slip up and impatient trader in his first week. But I hedged all the way up from 0.0826

Their mining BTC at a loss is a speculated part of the attack completely in line with the scenario. That is just another contributing piece of evidence they intend to eviscerate it.

BTC is artificially propped up though

Is now a good time to buy or should I let it bleed another day?

Does it kill their business plan more than BTC tanking and BCH taking over though?

I wouldn't be surprised if they were to try it in a last ditch situation.

there's the alternative that a wealthy/powerful person/company/government realised that bitcoin cannot be stopped and engineered the scaling debate to force a contentious hard fork so that they could accumulate more.

No doubt the unknown miner is that entity

Last ditch effort situation would only occur when it is too late to be saved - at a point where too much money has flowed into Bitcoin Cash for it to flow back to BTC. And those kikes at Blockstream have already reneged on their promised blocksize increases numerous times, why would anyone believe them during their deathrattle?

They wouldn't do it anyway, I envision a bunch of bagholders collecting BTC at sweet FA prices. BTC cannot fundamentally win long term.

Blockstream want to choke BTC and force everyone onto the lightning network so they can derive a fee from usage of the lightning network, however you'll still need to pay the mining fee on top of that - it can never compete with BCH no matter what. Simple economics.

That's one thing I've always wondered. It really seems like BTC has been set up to fail purposely but BCH got in the way.

Alright you kikes. I'm in with you all.

Sadly bch was already compromised when lack of interest allowed bitmain to control 51%+ of the network (actually, 97%).

Also bch was created to preserve the asicboost exploit. You either run it (as bitmain does), or lose out as a miner. Sadly, asicboost is proprietary software ("Satoshi's vision!"), and the patent is owned by a bitmain subsidiary. So you have to "pay to play", if you want to mine Jihancoin/bcash.

It's too risky to hold right now. It is frothy from $600 and up. There's no real new money flowing into it, because everyone got I as an airdrop, yet a lot of dupes expect it's price to rise beyond the rate of BTC increase.

With flawed tech, and a more than 50% price correction required before we reach real money valuations, there is nothing to attract people to bch over other ALTs. Tread carefully.

Are you faggots ready to have your asshole torn wide open?

.1 BCH 3k buy wall just went up on bittrex

First. There is zero concrete evidence at all that asicboost has actually been used in production mining, period, and even allowing that someone may be doing it in stealth necessarily opens the possibility that *anyone* may be using it in stealth, because patent breach suits are not bought against activities which are for all intents and purposes invisible.

Second, mining, like any process driven by technology and hardware, is a constantly evolving field, and where it sits at any one point in time does not by any stretch of the imagination dictate where it will actually end up. As we speak various vendors across the world are gearing up to compete virogiously with Bitmain in the SHA256 ASIC space, and as per the way these things *always* work, eventually SHA256 mining will be a simple commodity service with healthy competition from multiple vendors widely distributed amongst stakeholders in the POW production industry and margins driven to near zero.

And last of all, the incentives in the system don't stop working just because you pass some magic number in control of the production of proof of work. On the contrary the more involved you are in putting the fuel into the machine that keeps the entire program running, the more incentivised you are to ensure that your investment is not squandered on either attacking the system or allowing others to attack or subvert it from under you. We don't need to trust miners to work in our interest. Only their own. That is the entire game theory underpinning for nakamoto consensus.

Either that consensus is valid, and BTC is doomed, or it's not, and the entire cryptocurrency game was just an illusion from the beginning waiting for us to get to this point of an empirical test at scale of the underlying foundations of the construct, at which point we watch it collapse and go back to our normal mechanisms of social organisation. If you believe that, you shouldn't be in crypto at all. If you don't, you should be in BCH.

the same thing happened with Litecoins hashrate. Its not compromised until they start acting maliciously.

this guy went all in wucoin

better wucoin than woocoin.

your argument is incoherent. Bitmain can't want to both destroy the reputation of bch and think that will help asic boost at the same time.

assuming bitmain has no interest in maintaining bitcoin as outlined in the whitepaper then they can have 1 of 2 motivations:
they either did nothing to compromise the bch blockchain because they want to maintain asic boost patent value.
or
they changed the ledger because they wanted to accumulate btc by dumping accumulated bch (simultaneously destroying the value of asic boost)

In reality bitmain knows in order for increased bitcoin adoption it needs more on chain scaling

Scam currency

stupid fucking coin making the rich richer i.e american taxes
>>fucking trump
>>fucking merica

this was meant to be in reply to

>your argument is incoherent. Bitmain can't want to both destroy the reputation of bch and think that will help asic boost at the same time.

That... wasn't my argument at all. In fact I'm at a lost to even imagine how you came to a conclusion close to approaching that. Bitmain working in its own self interest would obviously want to *validate* the reputation of BCH.

>more asicboost nonsense.

Do you know what asicboost actually does because it seems that you don't. It has nothing to do with "maintaining bitcoin as outlined in the whitepaper" and it doesn't allow you to "change the ledger" anymore than a "legitimate" increase in SHA256 hash power would.

> In reality bitmain knows in order for increased bitcoin adoption it needs more on chain scaling

Finally something we agree on. It is unclear how you imagined I held a different position to begin with.

...

aha. fair call

...

Enjoy not having segwit you dummy.

Who said Bitmain was trying to destroy the reputation of BCH? I have no idea where you got that conclusion from.

Bitmain seeks profits. it knows that many of the new influx of normiecoin holders who got an airdrop of bch are too new to know about the fears of 51% attacks. In fact, there has been virtually no discussion about the fact bitmain had a total monopoly on the network for the first few months.

Bitmain purely wanted to mine in an arena where they retained a competitive edge. They do this through asicboost: you either use it, and pay their tithe, or you don't and get undermined.

The threat of double spending is death for crypto. Running such huge control over the network means it reverts to issues of trust in market participants, once again. The very thing that Satoshi wanted to remove from the current imperfect money markets.

That guy last posted 2 hours ago and the reply wasn't even to you... And no one even misses segwit...

they're not trying to but if it has compromised the ledger via 51% attack then bch will crash as soon as there is evidence of this. Then asic boost patent is useless

>And no one even misses segwit...
You will.

segwit has literally no benefit other than it allows blockstream to run 2nd layer services that make them money