So what is to be expected when GDAX opens BCH/BTC trading?

Dragon slaying confirmed

see picture for last time they opened up sales

So coinbase collects stupids fees

>transferring Blockstream Core

Wew

BCH is technologically superior to BTC in all ways. No one can prove me wrong.

Corecucks;
>Scamcoin herrrrrrrfr
>Rodger is a bad person

a big part of that was because no one could move their bch to coinbase, it was under maintenance the whole night

i meant rich fags not poor fags. ive moved .5 btc and up and paid the 40-50 dollar fee no problem. but i can see how this would hurt someone who has less

>All ways.
Explain faggot

I've only got a little left that isn't on an exchange, but more than enough to cover the fees. Rich or poor, paying these fees and lead times just isn't usable.

Scalable
Fast
Cheap
Right now

I was shilling pfr and prl here for you on /biz since both were 0.07 and 0.01 respectively. Get profit on egas and make me (and you) rich.
Take a look@ coinmarketcap.com/currencies/ethgas/

>Supposed peer to peer payment system
>Get fucked by core
>$40 fees and hours if not days wait time transferring

People forget 99% of the world earns less than $40 a day.

>Feed the masses, eat with the classes.
>Feed the classes, eat with the masses.
* Never been typed on Veeky Forums before

Remember this post - BCH will be the winner. Why else do you think alts took off like they have? It's because btc is fucking pathetic in terms of what it was started for and then shit the God damn bed not being smart and looking in to more than mining fees, faggots.

CB also owes millions in trade fees, right?

>in your dreams

BTC will always be king

I don't know what will happen with BTC and BCH in the future (guess it depends on what happens with LN) but this pair on GDAX will do nothing at all, maybe like a 3% pump on BCH for a few minutes.

It has no devs lmao

Absolutely nothing.
They could have really had something with the normies, but they fucked up the first and only chance they had of scamming people who'd buy it thinking it was some kind of deluxe bitcoin.
Now all the normies have zero trust in it because of last time's shitshow, and everyone else who knows better is informed enough not to buy it unless it's ready for another PND.

They reached too clumsily and failed.

lmao stupid corecucks cant stop the dragon slaying.

dump your corecuck bags now.

BLegacy

I agree.

There's a lot of promises about "the future of lightning network" but the harsh reality is that the punters will go with a currency that they can use TODAY.

People don't understand decentralisation and nodes but they understand $40 fees burning a hole in their pocket

You're wrong and you know it but still typed it. That's the state of dilusion about this. Literally people lying to themselves. Like Dems and Russia Collusion.

I actually think that most normies will side with BTC/LN if it really does get decent adoption, because the masses are the ones who don't care about "Satoshi's vision" and all that philosophical stuff. Look at all the people who bought fucking RIPPLE of all things.

BCH will be dumped unless people act irrationally, which they will

BCH is a garbage shitcoin and anyone who tells you otherwise understands nothing about the underlying technology - be weary of them.

Why would you think GDAX adding the pair would move the price significantly? They've already got both paired with USD and plenty of other exchanges with more shitcoin volume have the BCH/BTC pair.

Get this...

>literally nothing

Big blocks are not Satoshi's vision, they were his short-sighted comments when he was initially justifying the protocol when literally everyone was skeptical. He made it possible to implement higher level protocols like LN for a reason

Wong. Our world has became about efficiency and btc isn't. And it better fucking hurry. It's lost so much market cap its insane and I don't think any bullshit bandaid can help it now. It fucked itself, no denying.

I don't understand the type of brain dead retard that buys BCH. You are just HOPING that the chinese randomly pump it again for some 2x gains, against the risk of it inevitably bleeding out with or without bitcoin crashing too.

There are like 5 different solid 100xers available right now and the cashies are still buying fucking BCH lol.

What about signatures user? We are witnessing what smart money has been doing for 3 months?

bcash. Lol.

The marketcap it lost is just part of the alt cycle that happens literally 2-3 times per year. In a few weeks (or months at most) alts will all dump and BTC will pump again. Then BTC will dump and alts will pump again, etc.

BTC with LN (assuming it works as intended and has decent adoption) will be more efficient than BCH at the cost of centralization. But normies don't care about centralization, they just FOMO in for profits. Look at Ripple, look at how most of the top marketcap coins are pre-mined shittokens now.

>Why would you think GDAX adding the pair would move the price significantly?
I think adding 100+ times more buyers would help. Look at the past few weeks/month - are people fucking happy to be holding btc? Really happy to be holding slow, expensive shit? If so, why has market share fallen to lowest level ever on a consistent basis?

Name 1 time ever where btc market cap has ever been lower? I'll suck your dumb dick if you can name one.

crypto late adopters (bch pumpers) are even worse than pajeet shitcoin pumpers because they actually believe their precious coin isn't yet another shitcoin. embarrassing

You can already buy BCH on GDAX, they have a BCH/USD pair. You can also already trade BCH/BTC pair on exchanges that have more volume than GDAX. All I'm saying is, GDAX adding this pairing isn't going to change the price significantly, it's a non-event.

I don't remember what the dominance percentage was, but last year ETH came far closer to a real flippening then BCH ever will. I don't see why marketcap is a good argument for BCH when it was an even LOWER cap then BTC and even shit tokens like Ripple.

If BTC lighting doesn't succeed than ETH scaling will, and if ETH doesn't there is eos, stellar, neo, cardano, and many other promising platforms.

There is no long term purpose to BCH.

It did if you count all of the ERC20 shit token projects it spawned long ago. BTC created a digital ecosystem. ETH turned that ecosystem into an infomercial.

BTC lightning scaling will succeed and BCH block size scaling will not succeed. Block size scaling is just throwing more hardware at it - everyone who knows anything about computer science, algorithmic complexity theory, and scaling distributed systems, knows that this is not a good technique whatsoever, especially when you're anticipating continued exponential growth

Buy 99% of CB users own crypto. It's on gdax. It's not like the larger market isn't crypto to crypto vs fiat to crypto right now. Fiat isn't pouring in as of today. Maybe when tax refunds come out that will change to like last March/April. That was fiat influx.

>crypto late adopters (btc pumpers) are even worse than pajeet shitcoin pumpers because they actually believe their precious coin isn't yet another shitcoin. embarrassing

Fixed that for you.

how does it feel being this delusional? we're all here as multi-millionaires thanks to bitcoin and we got your little shitcoin FOR FREE. but feel free to keep pumping it, it's just free money for us guys.

And both times they added USD to bch they had to throttle down for fucking hours and days. People want out of btc. That's why last have shot up and btc bled market share. You're reasoning like a boomer holding 100 year treasury bonds.

Do you understand Bitfinex, Bittrex, Binance, and a million other shitcoin exchanges (some of which do more volume then GDAX) already have BCH/BTC pairings? Not to mention, if people were THAT desperate to get out of BTC they could trade it for USD then buy BCH with USD on GDAX. I'm not saying which blockchain will succeed in the future, I'm just answering OPs question by saying that GDAX adding a BCH/BTC pair will be a non-event.

>BTC lightning scaling
So it will be even further from actual bitcoin when that happens? Nobody mentions the signatures which was what paragraph 1 on page 2? You got kiked by core. I own neither and am fucking happier than you with my past 60 day gains I bet my dick on it.

Bittrex and Binance don't.

What about color coins? BTC is just an experiment at best now. It has became give us money for an overpriced nothing shit that kikes continue to change and fuck with while making the previous version obsolete on purpose because they hated it from the beginning.

BTC isn't a peer to peer currency.
BTC isn't a store of value.

Then what the fuck is it? It's test net...

Further from actual Bitcoin? It is Bitcoin. Look user I'm not stupid, I'm a professional software engineer who works on distributed low latency servers at {big_company} with experience writing low level network stack related tools. I'm not trying to mislead you or something, I'm trying to inform you on how software and the scaling of distributed systems works

IEEE 802.3 < IP < TCP/UDP < HTTP < BrowserScripting etc.

Similarly
BTC blockchain < Lightning Network < (...?)

It's a system of nested layers each of which scales in different ways. That is how network protocols are created and simply saying "Let's throw more hardware at it" does not work, period, end of story, sorry user. BCH has been lying to you.

Schnorr Signatures are also a great way to condense transactions involving many signatures. You're questioning it and acting like it's something bad? There is nothing bad here. Many other cryptos will implement it if they haven't yet as well.

I'm not chasing pumps. I want safety for the majority of my capital and speculate with the rest.

>inb4 take it out of crypto

What does avoiding pumps have to do with BCH? If you want a stable secure coin buy BTC, maybe if you're an autistic retard like you evidently are given your trip, keep 10% BCH.

Yea they do, it's "BCC" on those exchanges.

FUCK MOORES LAW AND FUCK WHITE PEOPLE

You realize that with Segwit if the network gets congested the transactions will get sent through without updating thus losing users funds. The only way to stop this is to freeze transactions for a time. And at 1 MB blocks it takes 25 years to get 5 billion transactions done (the number of potentail users). So if you are a software engineer you are a damn shit one if you can't do the basic math to see that even if Lightning allows for temporary scaling, when the main chain gets full the Lightning Network transactions can't clear. Then add on top of that the fact that Lightning Nodes can reject any user from using their channels so they can reject users from using Bitcoin. Great system jackwagon.

BCH is trending up, while BTC is trending down

I think BCH to $3000 and BTC will test $10,000

no idea where ETH will go, it might keep going up and up or it might correct deeply

I think I'd buy ETH right now

There is absolutely no fucking reason not to scale up block size. Even if you believe it to be a bandaid. It alleviates congestion until another solution can scale.

I'm still hedging with BTC, though most of my stack is BCH. However if my entire stack was BCH id actually have more money rn.

>let's pretend to be against white people while at the same time being pro-BCH - that will surely turn people away from it, genius!

Really easy to figure you out, schlomo. try again, faggot.

Bitcoin Cash is releasing extension blocks to add basically any protocol from any other block onto their blockchain. With extension blocks they can add all privacy protocols, smart contract protocols, or basically any other variation related to blockchain token transfers. So BCH will literally have the ability to add the applications of each and every other coin on the market onto their platform. This is possible only because of the massive blocksizes planned for BCH. Please tell me why you would buy any other coin if BCH will offer the features of all coins on the market wrapped up into one.

Are you a new user? Lurk more faggot.

Moore's Law is ending you retard haven't you been paying attention

>Hurr on-chain transactions can't scale to 5 billion users, let's make it 8 times faster and that will fix the problem

Lightning Nodes have an incentive to be used and thus there will be always open ones because you're losing money to not open it if there's a potential for throughput there. You can always route around ones that choose to censor you. Plus you don't HAVE to use LN for everything, you just have the option. Thus censorship is not broken, whereas with centralized coins with BCH it is broken.

Yes there is - you can't run low performance full nodes anymore retard

I don't think you understand investment - short term results like that don't matter unless you planned to cash out, all that matters is the future

>
sauce?

>let's charge 2000 people $30 each every 10 minutes to save some guy running a node $100 every year

there has to be a balance between how big blocks are and how expensive transactions are

2MB right now would have been the ideal block size for BTC, but power-hungry retards convinced enough useful idiots that scaling is bad

Moore's law hasn't ended. Do you even qualifies as a full node? If it doesn't have hashpower it validates NOTHING and does NOTHING for the network. Fucking end your life.

>Lightning Nodes have an incentive to be used and thus there will be always open ones because you're losing money to not open it if there's a potential for throughput there. You can always route around ones that choose to censor you. Plus you don't HAVE to use LN for everything, you just have the option. Thus censorship is not broken, whereas with centralized coins with BCH it is broken.

You can only route your transaction through channels with the connections to route your transaction. If channels are opened and closed randomly that gives you only a 63% chance of routing your channel if each user opens 1 channel. In other words, unless you completely centralize Bitcoin Segwit and make one entity control who can open and close channels it is very easy to censor users as there will be very few routes through which transactions can clear. So all you have to do to censor someone is operate the node they require for their transaction to clear. If the government gains any control over the nodes then the system is completely compromised.

It's not "for the network" whatever that even means, it's for the end users retard who are the most important part of the network. Running your own full node gives merchants security, if not everyone can do it BTC becomes more centralized

Signatures nigger....

Then the censored individual can stop using LN and instead use on-chain transactions which will now be much cheaper since the chain will be used less because non-censored users will be using LN

LN doesn't need perfect decentralization and censorship resistance, it's just a plus. Only the blockchain itself needs that, and it has it. But it has less of it if you take the "big blocks, fuck decentralization" mindset

The blockchain needs to be perfect, you CANNOT fuck with it, it is the foundation. Lightning Network is a boost, not a foundation.

The fact that this is beyond you people tells me you don't understand the purpose of any of this.

Signatures nigger? What the fuck are you talking about? You keep saying "signatures" as if that means anything without context - are you mentally retarded?

BTC has lost 30% in 2 months an ld bounces between a $6K spread. Now think about who can afford $14,000 for 1 BTC. It's like 0.0001% of the worlds population now.

Running a node with no hashpower doesn't validate anything at all on the network. Nodes that run without hashpower actually make the network less secure because it causes more hops than necessary to reach a miner to validate transactions.

Why is this an issue? Nobody needs 1BTC. Most people don't even have 1BTC worth of money in their bank account.

Running YOUR non-mining full node as YOUR wallet gives YOU complete security and validation. This aspect isn't about the network. Miners generate blocks with transactions in them, the number of hops required for signed transactions to reach miners does not matter - miners do not "validate transactions" in the way you are describing, non-mining full nodes do for the end-user. I don't think you understand how this actually works and are instead mouthing off the same common BCH talking points I always hear

>The blockchain needs to be perfect, you CANNOT fuck with it, it is the foundation. Lightning Network is a boost, not a foundation.
Then why does Segwit remove digital signatures from the blockchain which removes the fraud-proof nature of blockchains?

Also the fees on the main-chain must increase with the advent of the Lightning Network as each node will now have a source of income. Increasing off-chain transactions also increases the number of times these off-chain transactions must be settled on-chain. So on-chain transaction fees never decrease, if you are censored off Lightning you can't use Bitcoin. So Bitcoin is not Peer-to-Peer, it is not decentralized, it is not an electronic cash system, and it is not an electronic coin.

Non mining nodes don't validate transactions at all! All they can do is receive valid transactions and detect malicious actors, but can do fuck all about it. Actual merchants would have value in this but isnt required and isn't fucking cost prohibitive at all. Niggers in Africa dont need to run nodes from their fucking Blackberries!

>Running YOUR non-mining full node as YOUR wallet gives YOU complete security and validation. This aspect isn't about the network. Miners generate blocks with transactions in them, the number of hops required for signed transactions to reach miners does not matter - miners do not "validate transactions" in the way you are describing, non-mining full nodes do for the end-user. I don't think you understand how this actually works and are instead mouthing off the same common BCH talking points I always hear
So are you trying to tell me that you need small blocks in order to validate your transactions on the blockchain even though with the Lightning Network all your transactions will be done off-chain? Do you not see the problem here? Also miners do validate transactions in the same way full nodes do because miners are full nodes. Also as long as you use SPV you get the full security of running a full node without being a full node.

BCH's price will shoot up. Bitcoin will dip further. Worse case is more horizontal movement while Bitcoin continues to dip.

$$$$$
Flippening

You mean wary.
The difference is like so; I, as someone with an intimate underestanding of the underlying technology and weary of people like you. It would be pointless to be wary of you, as your statement makes it clear that you are a fucking idiot, and fatigue rather than caution is the appropriate response to a world drowning in idiocy.

Daily reminder bitcoin cash is the one TRUE bitcoin. It is Satoshi's Vision and will overthrow the old king and take its rightful place on the throne of crypto

http:// i.imgur.com/ok74kiT.jpg
wake up, you are being lied to.

...

fucking Dr Craig lol

See everyone likes to say Satoshi is not Craig, but Satoshi was a British or Australian asshole who was a master of computer sciences, statistics, and economics and Craig is also all of those things.

cool story corecuck

I was shilling pfr and prl here for you on /biz since both were 0.07 and 0.01 respectively. Get profit on egas and make me (and you) rich.
Take a look@ coinmarketcap.com/currencies/ethgas/

True.

But Bitcoin Cash is the true BTC.

This

Yup. I may be Californian, but as a nocturnal Californian I mostly associate online with Australians, of which Satoshi is definitely one.

> BCH
> Scalable

ha.

STFU

> farther from true BTC
god forbid we improve upon a piece of technology gosh!

But it's gotten worse

no it hasn't, the network has gotten more congested because of adoption.

btc has gotten better. it will become much more apparent when the big boys adopt segwit.