To anyone still holding BTC, why aren't you holding ETH instead? Serious question

>always do opposite of what biz says
are any of you concerned that every biztard is saying eth can't be stopped

>will
*while

>seriously dumb question
when btc drops eth drops. why aren't you in fiat, user?

Well there are to many coins tied to it. So if eth fails so will half the market.

This isn't a heat of the moment question. Everyone had to use BTC at some point when getting started in this space and that experience should have put everybody off investing it. Its slow, expensive and the devs don't give a fuck. Why would anyone decide to put money into this 1 month ago, 6 months ago or right now instead of putting that money into ETH?

That's why BTC is still 50% down from its ATH and ETH is only like 100$ away? I'm not in fiat because I don't like gambling by attempting dip timing

Ethereum is working on their own scaling solutions: sharding, plasma, raiden. But don't forget bitcoin is as well. People will have differing opinions on which is better.

dip timing is literally nothing to any trader worth a dime. stay poor hodl fag

Which one looks like its due for a pump? Recently picked up a few btc with my eth, lets see how it pans out

Digibyte is superior, wtf is ETH lol -.-

twitter.com/BobSummerwill/status/952546192449155072

>Diversification in crypto doesn't really matter
famous last words

>muh fixed supply of 21M

BTC will be the currency coin once Lightning is working well.

Ethereum will be crushed by ADA (or something else) that doesn’t choke from Vitalik’s cryptokiddies.

Bitcoin sacrifices trustlessness.

Whoa—- Chad Fad confirmed.

Cause BTC holders are a cult of delusionals

this might be the one time bitcoin takes a beating, and then doesn't get back up again

All I'll say is remember what happened when bcash was pumping, I know this situation isn't exactly the same, but just be careful.

I'm well diversified, just got greedy - wanted to get in on the (hopefully upcoming) btc pump, move to eth, then move to alts

>muh TA

I'm an investor, not a trader (gambler). I'll probably end up out earning you in the long run

the amount of ignorance and wishful thinking in this post

If anyone is left without a chair it will be BTC holders

I own both, but BTC is superior in terms of being able to replace money, and security.

While ETH is an extremely useful concept,having a turing complete layer 1 means it will be hacked, and repeatedly. BTC offers better security by having smart contracts in second layer ie rootstock

BTC can't do worthwhile smart contracts

What exactly are you basing that on? Rootstock will provide the extensibility to put it on par with ethereum

?

all your second layer solutions are useless if the first layer caps at 300k tx/day

how can BTC EVER compete in a world where Ethereum has sharding - it's almost a joke that you think BTC will be relevant when ETH has 300x BTC capacity on chain

To avoid hassles that come with being Turing complete, Ethereum charges for operations, that's what gas is all about. If someone wants to spam the network somehow, they better be fucking Bill Gates.

I'd only be looking to get into bitcoin once it first finds support, then begins uptrending on the daily timeframe.

switched to ETH mid december
BTC is no longer the king, meanwhile ETH will probably go to 5k this year

It's not about preventing spam, it means that it is impossible to make the protocol completely secure. BTC having a restricted core code means it is much more bulletproof

For a small smart contract like a sports bet I agree eth will be used, but for a £50m insurance smart contract, this will utilise the BTC blockchain for the superior security

> it means that it is impossible to make the protocol completely secure
do you have a reason to make this claim? stop using a metric you don't understand

BTC and ETH have entirely different use cases. I've got money in both.

Here you go, bro. Good to have these discussions on biz: cryptocompare.com/coins/guides/what-is-the-gas-in-ethereum/

>The gas price per transaction or contract is set up to deal with the Turing Complete nature of Ethereum and its EVM (Ethereum Virtual Machine Code) – the idea being to limit infinite loops. So for example 10 Szabo, or 0.00001 Ether or 1 Gas can execute a line of code or some command. If there is not enough Ether in the account to perform the transaction or message then it is considered invalid. The idea is to stop denial of service attacks from infinite loops, encourage efficiency in the code – and to make an attacker pay for the resources they use, from bandwidth through to CPU calculations through to storage.

What do you mean they have different use cases? ETH is a superset of BTC, and BTC is garbage in the overlap

LN is literally trustless you fucking moron.

Google any of the following brainlet
>what is DAO hack
>drawbacks of turing completeness
>rootstock
>how many times has bitcoin blockchain been hacked

You needn't use an infinite loop to steal all the eth from a smart contract.

>what is DAO hack
not a platform bug you absolute retard

>how many times has bitcoin blockchain been hacked
as many times as Ethereum

>drawbacks of turing completeness
>rootstock
burden is on you to explain why rootstock is safer than Ethereum

a smart contract lives within a limited scope; it can't do anything more than it has permission to do, turing complete or not, rootstock or not

pretty disingenious to call me a brainlet when you know you're getting into waters you don't understand, retard

I think I see where you're coming from, I was misunderstanding what you were saying. Guess I need to look into what you're saying more.

BTC is like gold.. and LTC is silver

Btainlets fail to see code is mutable through forks and bitcoin can be whatever it wants, but nothing else can be bitcojn.
See you at 1mm btc

Due for a pump? Nobody owes BTC a pump, things rise and fall for reasons outside of being owed a pump.

By that logic you should all in TRON right now, it's long overdue for a pump ;)

ETH is a shitcoin? Lol

So you're arguing that solidity is completely bulletproof, buffer overflows VM escapes and various other exploits simply do not happen?

Muh store of value. Also first mover advantage. Literally AOL of crypto

ETH reached 0.1BTC last year, guess what happened later?

You have to be retarded if you think lightning network will work in any decent capacity or make it any less of a shitcoin compared to everything else

I'm arguing that Ethereum is practically and effectively secure; you have no argument for why it isn't other than "its harder cuz muh turing!!!"

Once people find out 95% of ICO's are shit and ethereum can't handle transactions in volumes like btc has now, yes... ethereum isn't the answer.

I think part of that user's argument is that bitcoin's embedded simplicity (compared to Ethereum), is part of what makes safer. The downside being that it will never have the on-chain functionalities that Ethereum will have.

That's not my argument at all, I was making the point that BTC having a restricted core code means the number of possible exploits is drastically reduced, and having the smart contract functionality off the main chain means it's potentially less disastrous if an exploit is found.

bitinfocharts.com/comparison/transactions-transactionfees-btc-eth.html#6m

>ethereum can't handle transactions in volumes like btc has now
??????????????????????????????

????????????
????????????????????????????

corecucks are the worst

> ethereum can't handle transactions in volumes like btc has now
Are you actually retarded?

ETH has the use case of powering the web 3.0, while BTC has the use case of transferring wealth from third-worlders and libertarians to jewish bankers. Completely different use cases.

it's only potentially safer, it's not necessarily safer

rocks are also safer to use than BTC, yet rocks aren't very interesting

and I don't get the point you're making that it's less disastrous that it happens on a second layer; the worst that can happen in either scenario is that funds are moved to people who they aren't supposed to go to, I don't see the relevancy of which layer it happens on

>he isn't accumulating rocks with interesting properties for when we go back to a stoneage economy and they skyrocket in price

just bought 100k

bitcoin is still king!
eth is extremely worthy of being number 2, but don't think bitcoin won't have a comeback

Imagine the scenario where someone is able to maliciously and repeatedly invoke a function on an eth smart contract that holds a lot of eth, they have effectively shut the entire network down. If this happens off the main chain other people can still transact in a situation like this.

You seem to think I am anti eth, I am not - I hold almost as much eth as I do bitcoin.

You're myopic. End of story.

Not an argument.

which part of "superset" did your retarded self not understand?

It costs money to invoke smart contracts; if someone has the money to waste, they can already do what you're proposing

You're missing the point, you can use a bug in solidity to do that in someone else's smart contract, using their money without permission.

ah - fair

still very much a hypothetical - we have not seen a platform vulnerability yet

i have never touched bitcoin
bought ETH from CB, used ETH trading pairs

Tbh I would still say bitcoin and eth aren't even in direct competition, they both fill particular niches extremely well. I'm holding lots of both until at least 2020

Strongly disagree - but ye, lets just vote with our money