BTC $50K When?

Peer to peer transactions will still be a thing so miners will still have an incentive to mine. It just won't be clogged up by places like coinbase splitting one Bitcoin into 20 different parts in order to then push how bad it is when it's their fault.

Remember, all Bitcoin FUD is by BCashies.

Exchange will never use LN. Therefore no reason to hit 50k

>Remember, all Bitcoin FUD is by BCashies

Thanks. Makes sense..

John mcafee will eat his own dick b4 50k

xrp is superior to lighting network. I don't believe xrp is a decentralised, uncesorable money

people won't pay high fees to do on chain transactions for altruistic reasons if lighting network provides low fee payment.
Additionally segwit has already completely ruined the long term security of btc's blockchain because it removes the financial disincentive for miners to move coins without the owners signature and then collude to make those blocks the longest chain. If that happened to you there would be no way to prove your coins were stolen

"we need to go off chain to scale"
>that won't work
"just use an on chain transaction"

corecucks have cognitive dissonance, and that propels them to attack anyone who points out btc flaws, call them all bcrash shills

>btc
>xrp

The fees aren't high because of Bitcoin itself, they're high because instead of places doing one transaction for 1000 bitcoins, for example, they're splitting it into 1000 transactions of one. Both the 1000btc tx and the 1btc tx take up the same space.
What LN will do is, if you constantly trade 10btc to an exchange then you set a channel off the chain with the exchange for 10btc that you both agree to. That way you're not driving on the congested road but using the secret tunnel you built under your house directly to wherever the channel goes on a motorcycle.
That drops transactions in the blocks and will allow you to send money to people you're not channeled with for much much cheaper.

Neither Segwit2x or LN would allow someone to to steal your coins. The 51% attacks only allow the undocumented double spending.

You would use on chain transactions if you wanted to trade to an address that isn't connected to you by any channel.

fees are high because there is a limited block size and core implemented replace by fee which means you can push other transactions out of the next block if you pay a higher fee. This is basic economics reduced supply with increasing demand increases price.

there is not a single reason 1mb blocks are a good idea. the common misconception is larger blocks will centralise btc because nodes will require more ram and become cost prohibitive to run reducing the number of nodes. This is a misconception because non mining nodes do nothing, saying a non mining node helps decentralise bitcoin is like saying watching a tennis match on tv will change the outcome of the game.

the whole point of bitcoin is to have a distributed ledger, lightning is no different to swift in conception and is actually less efficient in operation

I am not talking about 51% attack heresegwit means it can be profitable for miners to move coins without the oners signatures because the signatures are separated from the hash. this isn't worth it financially without segwit because there is too much incentive to not mine on those transactions without signatures youtube.com/watch?v=hO176mdSTG0&t=1s

Yes, I've already addressed the block fees. I acknowledged the size issues and paying higher fees so you can be higher in the queue was what I assumed this next post was going to be about. Imagine me giving an example of a Bus stop but whoever pays more than the bus fee gets let on to take someone else's spot.
Segwit and LN arent the same so comparing them is a bit worthless.

This is why the LN is a good thing. It gets people out of using the main transaction path, through blocks, into the lightning network for commonly done transactions. Causing less people to go through the block chain. Lowering fees.

Creating a block 8x the size means nothing. If people really cared about doing 8x the transactions more people would go to Lite coin where it's 2mb blocks 4x faster. Bitcoin cash has nothing more than any other coin to that tried to fix the scaling issue except that it has Bitcoin in the name for marketing purposes. No one even cared until it started getting marketed as "the real vision of Satoshi" and coinbase picked it up and now people only care because they want to be rich, not because it fixes anything.

before replace by fee you could pay anything an be include in the next block.

there is not a single reason to limit the blocksize at 1mb

there is no good reason for segwit

LN does not encourage on chain trasactions

LN whitepaper reuires 133mb blocks