So if you do the math it will take over 300 years in order to get everyone in the world onto the Lightning Network with 1MB blocks and another 300 years to get them off. So even if the Lightning Network is released no one will be able to use it before they die. Here's the math. In order for Lightning to have enough channels to route payments to everyone you need about 14 channels per person. 14 transactions per person x 5 billion adults who would use Lightning globally equals 70 billion transactions to get everyone on Lightning. 4,000 transactions per block x 144 blocks per day equals 576,000 transactions per day. 576,000 transactions per day x 365 days equals 210,240,000 transactions per year. 70 billion transactions to get the globe on Lightning / 210,240,000 transactions available per year equals 333 years to get the globe on the Lightning Network. And it will take another 333 years to close out all of these channels. So in total it will take almost 700 years for you to experience Lightning. So my question is, what kind of major life-extending drugs do I need in order to actually use this shitty fucking scaling solution.
Corecuck Delusions
Other urls found in this thread:
themerkle.com
twitter.com
I love how its happening before our eyes.
>Bittrex/Polo searches have doubled.
>BTC is going up but alts are going up with it.
>Debit card for BCH on fucking BITPAY
>Coinbase adding full support on the 1st
>Andreas Antonopoulos shilling alt coins and even name dropped Bitcoin Cash as possibly being the real Bitcoin
>Steam stopped using it cause transaction costs were too high
>Roger Ver BTFO's Corecucks weekly in interviews now
>BCH now has more miners
For anyone whoever wondered what happens when a fork succesfully takes the hashing power long enough to cause a flippening, its beginning now. I give it a year MAX.
This shows its happening. BTC is about to die in the next few months. Corecucks i urge you to abandon ship.
Ok If I'm doing my calculations right over the course of those 300 years you as the op will gain 2.5 faggots. With only 1mb blocks and unlimited faggotry available no one will be able to stand the amount of buttboners you will produce. Heres the math. In order for the faggotry to channel enough through you and to everyone else you need about 14 gay thoughts per person. 14 gay thoughts * 5 billion audlts would use this faggotry globally equals 70 billions fags to get everyone on your dick. 4000 faggotries per fag * 144 gays per OP per day equals 576,000 dicks in OP's mouth. 576,000 dicks per day * 365 days equals 210,240,000 dicks op will be guzzling down per year. 70 billion cum swaps to get the glob on ops faggotry / 210,240,000 dicks per OP's mouth availber per year equals 333 years to get reach the level of faggotry OP has commited. And it will take another 333 years to get the smell of cum off of OP. So in total it will take almost 700 years for OP to not become a faggot.
So my question is, what kind of major life-saving drugs do I need in order for OP to not infect the rest of the world with his faggotry.
Why don't we just use multiple blockchains at the same time?
5 billion users are not going to be using it right off the bat,and the 1mb limit would be raised despite what cash cucks want you to believe.
False flag by Roger Ver to pin it on /r/bitcoin no doubt
user i dont know what to tell you.. forking is a perfectly legitimate way of updating the coin's protocol.. We already did upgrade the block size limit.. its called BCH.
So in other words you are saying we need to expand the block size by at least a factor of 100 which is what Bitcoin Cash has been saying all along? I thought raising the block size centralized Bitcoin and made it unusable? Or have the Core supporters been lying/deluded this whole time?
non sequitur
>and the 1mb limit would be raised
Blockstream/Core spent more than half a year circlejerking on Twitter and instigating in a massive FUD campaign against Segwit2X - a WHOPPING 1MB increase. Blockstream has all the reasons to keep Bitcoin Legacy at 1MB, they want to sell side chains to businesses. The 1MB block limit is here to stay as long as Blockstream is in control.
There's a new tech called "Channel factories", which somehow allows you to create multiple channels under one transaction. (10% as many transactions)
it'd like LN channels, but with up to 15 people in an address.
I'm not sure how it works, but on surface glance it still seems its not nearly good enough.
Also any one person in the address can decide to close it at any time. It's a fragile system that would easily be rekt by trolls.
Wow so it can theoretically keep open channels between every person in the world even though it's obviously impractical. LN just keeps impressing me more and more.
I want to things like pay my electricity per minute so I'm sure I get accurate prices for my usage. That means a dedicated channel to my electric company and because of how the protocol works that gives me a route to all it's users. When I pay for coffee at the local coffee shop I also establish routes to the other local people who buy coffee there. The network scales to fit use so in most cases you won't need to pay a fee. The idea is that because most use cases are handled off chain you can actually use on chain direct transactions or open channels to an unrouted african address or whatever without high fees.
I hate this two party narrative you idiots have. Neither BTC or BCH have end users in mind and are just trying to make a quick buck. I'l stick with my autistic Russian powered global computation network thank you very much.
The reason not to raise the block size to 32 fucking mb is that it would require an extra yearly 1'6 tb in storage (i.e: a measly 120€/year cost since that is the current price of external 2tb hdd), and you think they'll go against the bullshit narrative they have constructed. Keep deluded, bcorie.
BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH BCASH
To connect those chains you need a central entity. Good luck trying to keep BTC1, BTC2 ...BTCn at the same price.
This. Bitcucks are cancer. Ethereum is the future.
>caring about faggot leddit drama
this. but it won't matter until after the mania and the bloodbath will need to be everything we are expecting it will be. at that point i personally don't see basic cash coins standing a chance, full blown privacy at the minimum or some need to be on the network for its services
Trips of truth.
Your post is very confusing, but you absolutely cannot have open channels between everyone in the world if it would take 700 years to open and close just 14. That would take trillions of years. Also Bitcoin Cash allows for streaming money using Lightning, it just doesn't allow you to share other people's channels so you can have a Lightning channel open with your electric company under Bitcoin Cash to pay for your electricity per watt or minute or whatever you like.
>manere pauper
>mfw the nocoiners talk about bubble while market cap doubled 2 weeks ago, and doubled again today
b-cashiers think everyone needs to open a Bitcoin lighting channel
they are not aware about cross chain routing
it is only a matter of time until we enable funds to flow across different blockchains
r/bitcoin was flagged multiple times for mod abuse
there was literally a bot running that would infinitely downvote anything with the phrase "unconfirmed transactions" at one point.
Ponzi tier pajeets are running the shit over there
Just like you have to open an account with a bank right? And keep some money in there or get charged with low balance fees?
And they send your funds around for you and take a little off the top each time?
>Sounds legit corecuck.
If bcash has better features for transactions and atomic swaps I may use it or my software may automatically choose it for a transaction but bcash isn't competitive for transactions versus all the other options like even dogecoin nor is it competitive as a stable and mature trusted store of value versus bitcoin.
themerkle.com
So you're saying that under Bitcoin Core's scaling solution you need alt-coins which means you should be selling your Bitcoin Core for alts correct? I'm way ahead of you on this one mate, been trading my Bitcoin Core coins away for awhile now.
user im sorry... you... dont know about xlm
The more transaction volume grows for Bitcoin Cash the lower the fees go. This is not true for any coin with a block size limit. I believe Doge has a blocksize limit. As far as I know only Bitcoin Cash is implementing an adaptive blocksize (other than maybe Ethereum).
>As far as I know only Bitcoin Cash is implementing an adaptive blocksize
Monero has a dynamic blocksize as well.
It means even though normies only trust bitcoin we can by interfacing it with the other coins still maintain a healthy crypto ecosystem with new coins competing to provide features like fast cheap transactions and advanced experimental smart contracts. So we can have both experimental development and normie trust which means faster mainstream adoption.
Then it should do very well in the future. I've always been a fan of privacy coins. I can't tell you the exact roadmap on them all though.
>Doesnt understand that block limit doesn't equal actual block size.
Why are core supporters' arguments always based on false beliefs?
What the fuck kind of bank do you use with low-balance fees? Is that really a thing? I've used a number of banks and I've had an account I didn't touch for years leaving only a couple dollars in it to keep it open and never got charged shit.
TETHERPUMP.EXE
There are fundamental difference in how we see things. I think in hundreds of tx/s per person, cashies ramble about visa. In the current state whatever the block size is it will be filled or transactions will be limited only by high fees because there is endless demand for them as long as they are not too expensive. Dice games and ubers charging per minute need dedicated channels not globally accessible public ledger entries broadcasted through satellite.
There is zero guarantee that you can always find a channel to pay someone.
ZERO.
If the infinite demand argument were true, a time with unfilled blocks would have never existed. The point of growing block size is to grow it in line with actual use. We're not going to see 1000tx/s for a long time. We'll probably never see it in BTC at the rate it's going, but BCH will scale to it just fine when the time comes. Moore's law says hello.
>biz says bcash is the "real Bitcoin"
>bcash shitcoin confirmed
When blocks were unfilled there was still large demand for transactions per user like dicegames and other microtransactions but most understood it was not actually practical. For mainstream adoption things should be seamless, you just use your bitcoin. With the LN we can develop for all kinds of use cases that require micro/nano transactions and settle on the normie trusted bitcoin chain.
>We're not going to see 1000tx/s for a long time.
>640kb is enough for everyone
It hurts hearing this and this is a prevalent view among cashies. It's limited thinking like is typical of marketing types. In a world where crypto delivers on its promises If I want to personally do hundreds of secure transactions and contract checks per second now it's not possible with current tech unless you use these kinds of dedicated channels.
>you are saying we need to expand the block size by at least a factor of 100
Your calculations assume a massive user base that doesn’t exist yet ,I believe the lightning network even on 1mb blocks will relieve a significant amount of pressure ,I also believe the block size will be increased to 2mb shortly after.
Segwit will fix the tx backlog