Bitcoin cash

fuc charlie lee

Litecoin is heavily outdated (same with bitcoin and its forks), and charlie managed to sell at the absolute peak of a FOMO bubble. It probably won't ever return to $300 ever again

BASED

If by anyone you mean pajeets - then sure

Isn't BLegacy a fork of bitcoin?

If I could, I wouldn't even buy bitcoin.

Both forks but Bcash is the unforked original blockchain. Bcore is the forked virgin blockstream chain.

How can you unfork when you hardfork to 8MB blocksize and EDA LOL

He used 6 of the 7 letters. Normies think there is a link.

Like I said, they're both forks. But Bcash chain has been forked again with segshit.

ironic because litecoin is a bitcoin fork

youtu.be/QbvtAlmfYQI?t=5m3s

if miners continue to mine blocks while colluding to not include witness data (which is only possible because of segwit) then coins can be moved without the owners signature and there is no witness data to show it was fradulent or not

you have to wonder why they implemented segwit when it is not even necessary for lightning

We all know they implemented segwit to enable anons to conspir on them on Veeky Forums and /r/btc.

ironically not far from the truth. scaling debate is the greatest accumulation market manipulation in history

Is it called Bitcoin lite though? You smelly fucking nigger

No kidding right. The only thing Litecoin offered was ASIC resistance which it now does not have. Charlie is not that bright.

Fuck off Pajeet

But Segwit coin is not Bitcoin as defined by the whitepaper. You cannot fundamentally change the nature of the coin and call it the same thing. Segwit coin needs a new name, it is not what was originally promised. Without signatures on the blockchain there is no proof against fraud. So the security of the blockchain is broken.

nice argument

>So the security of the blockchain is broken.
Then go ahead and double spend your bitcoins. What? You can't do it? That's because you are a retarded shill writing copypasta

This isn't an argument. He is just saying that he prefers Bitcoin Segwit which makes sense as if Bitcoin Segwit fails so does Litecoin Segwit. But I just wish the Segwit supporters could have arguments.

>implying any discussion is ever going to change your brainwashed (at best) or paid (most likely) mind
No thanks

That's not the point. He never said now it's easy for a random Pajeet on Veeky Forums to double spend. The point is that now you have no idea whether all of the transactions are legit or not.

Bcash
Bgarbage
Bcrash
Bfash

Call that dumpster fire how you want

Bullshit you can't double spend. I've done it multiple times you fucking tard. I'll tell you how since you're obviouslt retarded. Send a bitcoin segwit transaction with a fee much lower than needed for it to get included in the next few blocks. Wait for the transaction to get broadcasted to nodes as an unconfirmed transaction. Delete all unconfirmed transactions from your wallet. Re-send the Bitcoin Segwit to a new address with a higher fee. You just double spent.

You can double spend in five minutes if you're not retarded. You're right that wasn't the point of my post, but double spending is easy as pie in Bitcoin Segwit. One Bitcoin developer did it to Coinbase and got Coinbase to pay him without giving Coinbase any Bitcoin.

coingecko.com/buzz/peter-todd-explains-how-he-double-spent-coinbase?locale=en

segwit allows miners to mine on blocks without witness data
if multiple miners agree to mine blocks without witness data this means they can now move coins without the permission of the owner

this is not possible without segwit
segwit is not necessary for lighting network
why would they implement this other then?

Why does anyone care what some exit scammer is saying anyway

> The point is that now you have no idea whether all of the transactions are legit or not.
If that is true, you could make fake transactions and double spend. Go on, double spend your coins, I'll be waiting shill. If the system is broken as you say then anyone could do it you fucking cuck.

>I've done it multiple times you fucking tard
AHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
the state of pathetic bcash shills.
So why are you on Veeky Forums instead of enjoying your millions right now? Your posts reek like poo that has not found a loo.

>posts something written by a Core developer
he was pointing out how Coinbase being retarded and forkers (the ones who created bcash) being retarded could lead to double spending. You literally don't know what you are talking about lmao

>AHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
>the state of pathetic bcash shills.
>So why are you on Veeky Forums instead of enjoying your millions right now? Your posts reek like poo that has not found a loo.
coingecko.com/buzz/peter-todd-explains-how-he-double-spent-coinbase?locale=en
What the fuck was this then? A Bitcoin developer told Coinbase he was going to double spend, then he did double spend, and the automated systems at Coinbase didn't catch it so they paid the developer for Bitcoin that they never received. You fucking Segwit Soyboys are laughably retarded. I don't know how much meth you have to smoke to be this out of touch with reality, but double spending is ridiculously easy. I've done it almost a dozen times now.

>claims Segwit enables double spending
>posts something that happened when Segwit had not even been released yet
Imagine being this much of a brainlet, seriously. Imagine being so illiterate that you don't understand the problem there was with Coinbase and their shitty programming and not with the BTC protocol.
Literally IMAGINE being this much of a subhuman poo in loo.

You're right sorry, I meant double spending with a confirmation.

You are missing the point once again. If I, or anyone else, was double spending how would you know where it's coming from or if it's even happening? How would you even know that a Segwit transaction I sent you was legit?

>he was pointing out how Coinbase being retarded and forkers (the ones who created bcash) being retarded could lead to double spending. You literally don't know what you are talking about lmao
Can you read or write? This literally makes no sense and has no bearing on what is being talked about. Read the article and the posts and try again. Or maybe smoke less meth and then try again. You said double spending was impossible, I gave you proof from Core developers that it is not only possible but easy and you can scam merchants if you do it right.

why implement segwit when it is not necessary for lightning network and it incentivises miners to collude to mine blocks without witness data? which would allow them to move btc without the owners signature

It also feeds the false narrative that everyone needs to run a "full" node which slows down the network.

I never said Segwit allowed double spending you fucking tard. I said Segwit removes signatures from the blockchain meaning you can't tell if the transactions are valid. You brought up double spending. You are literally arguing against yourself. Are all Segwit supporters this retarded?

>So the security of the blockchain is broken.
This is the text of my post from which you asked if I could double spend. You're the idiot who can't follow an argument.

>If I, or anyone else, was double spending how would you know where it's coming from or if it's even happening?
You could notice it by looking at the blockchain you fucking moron

>How would you even know that a Segwit transaction I sent you was legit?
That's an r/btc meme. There is no loss of information in Segwit transactions.

>You said double spending was impossible
It is impossible on the protocol level, but if Coinbase is retarded like they have shown many times to be you could theoretically double spend by exploiting their retardness.
You are diverging the point here. You claimed that Segwit allowed double spending but your link dates back to when Segwit had not been released you fucking moron lmao. You literally played yourself.

>when it is not necessary for lightning network
It is necessary, and is also necessary for many other features Bitcoin will have in the future, including ones that enable privacy, something (((they))) don't want you to have.
> it incentivises miners to collude to mine blocks without witness data?
It doesn't. Miners are incentivized to collude when the network becomes centralized, as we have seen by Jihan and Roger spamming the Bitcoin mempool for years and trying to destabilize the network by creating bcash and shifting their huge mining power between one chain and the other to try and FUD people out of BTC. Segwit does not change incentives at all.

>meaning you can't tell if the transactions are valid.

If that was true then you could double spend

go poo in the loo user

He is literally too retarded to understand the implications of what he is saying, he is just a shill copy-pasting what his employer is paying him 2 rupees per post to write lmao

>It is impossible on the protocol level, but if Coinbase is retarded like they have shown many times to be you could theoretically double spend by exploiting their retardness.
>You are diverging the point here. You claimed that Segwit allowed double spending but your link dates back to when Segwit had not been released you fucking moron lmao. You literally played yourself.
I never claimed Segwit allowed double spending and if I did you could quote my text. You brought up double spending when I said Segwit removes the fraud proof nature of blockchain. It is Replace by Fee that allows double spending and this is a protocol level issue. It had nothing to do with Coinbase's systems. If you don't understand the basics of your coin why are you speaking? Replace by fee is what allows for the double spending. Just follow the posts backwards and you will see it was your dumbass who made the mistake.

>>So the security of the blockchain is broken.
>Then go ahead and double spend your bitcoins. What? You can't do it? That's because you are a retarded shill writing copypasta

Again, you are the one who thinks Segwit has something to do with double spending. I can't help you.

No you fucking tard, the security issue with Segwit is not double spends, it is creating transactions that were never meant to be created. Without signatures on the blockchain you can only assume transactions are valid. This means miners can create bullshit transactions that were not authorized by the owners of the coins. This is not double spending, it is straight up fraud. I don't know how you idiots don't understand the differences.

You must be a troll, because this stupidity is endless. You are literally arguing with yourself and then saying I said what you said. If you don't get that the security issues caused by Segwit are straight fraudulent transactions (without double spending) and the security issue caused by RBF is double spending I can't help you.

I feel sad knowing so many brainlets like you unironically by Roger's lies lmao.
Look pajeet it's very simple. If the protocol is broken, whether you think it's due to Segwit or something else, go on and double spend your coins. If you are not able to do it, and to prove to us that you did (not by cucking Coinbase, but by cucking the protocol itself) then your worse are literal trash not worth reading.
>Again, you are the one who thinks Segwit has something to do with double spending. I can't help you.
I think the problem here is that you don't understand that avoiding double-spending on a decentralized system is literally why the Bitcoin protocol was created. If you can't double-spend, then all your talks of "le security is broken" are just trash, again, that is not worth reading.

GO
POO
IN
THE
LOO

I gave you instructions how to do it you tard. Go and look up how to clear a stuck Bitcoin transaction. The answer is to double spend. You keep saying if Segwit isn't secure then you can double spend it, but the security issue with Segwit is that miners can send you coins from your wallet to their wallet without your permission. When miners send your coins to their wallet this is not double spending. What don't you understand?

>Without signatures on the blockchain you can only assume transactions are valid. This means miners can create bullshit transactions that were not authorized by the owners of the coins. This is not double spending, it is straight up fraud. I don't know how you idiots don't understand the differences.
The ignorance in this post is staggering but whatever, then go ahead and steal someone's coins, then post proof. We'll be waiting. What? You can't do it? Then it's bullshit, like everything you say you fucking shill

Obviously this is just a based Bitcoin Casher false flagging now.

Wish I wasnt such a wagecuck so I could invest more time in reading up what is going on lately. There is too much stuff and I have too little time.
Currently I'm getting not much but decent money from mining. I make an auto-exchange to LTC and send it automatically to my LTC Exodus wallet and hold it.
Mainly because of the high fees. Is LTC bad to hold long term?

Are you not worried that miners can take your coins and move them to whatever wallet they please? You realize that the two biggest miners are Roger Ver and Jihan Wu who oppose Bitcoin Segwit. How do you stop them from taking your coins? The only thing stopping them now is their stake in Bitcoin Segwit, but if they keep selling Bitcoin Segwit for Bitcoin Cash they don't have a very large incentive not to steal coins.

>IT IS LIKE THIS BECAUSE I SAY SO HURR DURR
Go ahead, steal someone's Bitcoins. We'll be waiting.

I would unironically hang all bcashers, fucking low IQ niggers that fall for such simple lies. You might as well believe gender is a spectrum or some other cuck shit like that.

>The ignorance in this post is staggering but whatever, then go ahead and steal someone's coins, then post proof. We'll be waiting. What? You can't do it? Then it's bullshit, like everything you say you fucking shill
I'm glad to see you still have no argument and can't even follow basic instructions. Your stupidity is mind-boggling and I just want everyone in this thread to read what you have posted and remember that this is the Segwit supporter. Then read my posts and realize I am the Cash supporter. That's all the evidence needed.

yeah I can't figure these guys out it's either
someone who owns heaps of bch and is stupid enough to think incoherent fud suppreses price

he's paid by someone to fud bch so that the person paying him can accumulate

he's paid by someone because they think they can stop bch with fud

he's invested too much in btc and has cognitive dissonance

>Are you not worried that miners can take your coins and move them to whatever wallet they please?
No because it is bullshit propaganda by Roger Queer

Again user, steal someone's BTC right now and show proof, otherwise you're a faggot. I don't give a shit about your baseless opinion that you read on plebbit. We are not niggers here, you either give evidence right now by stealing coins or you fuck off.

You didn't even know you can double spend Bitcoin Segwit and then you thought the double spending came from the Segwit protocol rather than Replace by fee. How can you call anyone retarded?

>am I retarded? Nah the whole world is conspiring against me
skinner.jpg

>You didn't even know you can double spend Bitcoin Segwit
Again as I told you, you can't. You literally can't. If you could, you wouldn't be here bitching for 2 rupees per post, you would be on the beach with a Mojito and a hooker, you fucking pajeet.

I thought was a fork of bitcoin.

Did you know NIST (national institute of standards in technology) consider BCH to be bitcoin and BTC to be a fork?

Mainly due to the massive fuckup that is segwit.

If you don’t believe me

bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2851249.0

>We are not niggers here
That's true. Even niggers understand the difference between double spending and fraud. You're obviously an aboriginal Australian as they are the only people with IQ's this low. I already gave you the proof of theft with Replace by Fee and the theft through signatures requires miner collusion which hasn't happened (yet).

S

>still no arguments but "I said so"
then provide evidence that miners are stealing you fucking moron. You are literally believing made-up shit, I hope you keep your BCH bags until it goes to 0, niggers like you deserve to stay poor

all you are doing is exposing people to the rational arguments against segwit by bumping this thread

>Again as I told you, you can't. You literally can't.
coingecko.com/buzz/peter-todd-explains-how-he-double-spent-coinbase?locale=en
What the fuck was this then? You already saw this posted yet you are too dense to admit that double spending in Bitcoin Segwit is not only possible, but easy.

>then provide evidence that miners are stealing you fucking moron.
I told you in the post you replied to it hasn't happened yet you stupid fuck. Can you even read?

bcash and litecoin are both shitcoins, the difference is one didnt try and purposefully confuse users by calling its aiirdropped token bitcoin.

theyre both going to trend to zero long term anyway.

After hanging out on Veeky Forums, when I see "is a scam", I want to ask "by scam, you mean don't buy it, right?"

>repeats the same argument
Cucking coinbase has nothing to do with Segwit or the bitcoin protocol. Futhermore, you keep saying double spending has nothing to do with "fraud" (so much wrong with this statement but whatever) but then you keep reposting that link.
And weren't Core developers liard and crooks? Now you use their words to prove something?
Your shit's all retarded

You are only exposing how much of a shill with nigger IQ you are

>it hasn't happened yet
no really imagine being THIS retarded. If it can happen, it would have already happened you fucking moron. If it hasn't happened yet it means it cannot happen. Do you think nobody would take the chance to steal from a network worth so many billions if they had the chance? You are less intelligent than a fucking monkey ffs.

Less than 20% of addresses have Segwit enabled and these things take a certain amount of hashpower. There are lots of reasons for it not to happen *yet*.

>Futhermore, you keep saying double spending has nothing to do with "fraud" (so much wrong with this statement but whatever) but then you keep reposting that link.
You ask for proof of double spending. I give proof. Then you say the proof isn't enough as it isn't proof of the fraud you can commit through creating fake transactions by having miners collude since witness data has been removed from the blockchain. Well no shit Sherlock the two issues are completely separate. You either have one or the other, not both simultaneously.

>no really imagine being THIS retarded. If it can happen, it would have already happened you fucking moron.
It's almost like getting all the miners to collude to do something to kill Bitcoin is hard. Just because it is possible doesn't mean it will happen immediately. For instance, it is possible you could come up with a logical argument, but it will likely take years. The reason people don't steal from Bitcoin Segwit in this way is that the profit from your theft would be zero as it would drop the price of Bitcoin to zero. This isn't a theft by which you make money, it is a theft designed to kill Bitcoin. Luckily for you the profit of the miners is keeping them from doing this, but if they ever decide to kill Bitcoin they can.

>says increasingly nervous cashcuck
But you said the problem was replaced by fee? And that Segwit would only make the stealing "invisible"? By your logic it is already happening. So show that it is happening or fuck off with your astroturfing nigger shit

>But you said the problem was replaced by fee?
Why do you keep mixing up Replace by fee and the fraud issue of removing signatures from the blockchain. It's been explained to you half a dozen times. The issues are separate you fucking Mongoloid.

Nobody said the sole issue was RBF and I never said Segwit makes double spending "invisible". But keep resorting to the bottom of the barrel attacks.

I'm sure you got a computer science background and can tell us exactly why segwit isn't needed for lightning. Go on

>You ask for proof of double spending. I give proof.
I already told you that isn't proof YOU FUCKING ILLITERATE NIGGER

> creating fake transactions by having miners collude since witness data
No such thing can happen you uneducated mongoloid, and none of that is even in that blog post you erroneously quote because you literally can't read.

>It's almost like getting all the miners to collude to do something to kill Bitcoin is hard
When miners colluded they created Bcash you fucking moron, your assumptions all stem from the fact that you think miners own the network (like the good cuck you are) but instead they serve the network.
>The reason people don't steal from Bitcoin Segwit in this way is that the profit from your theft would be zero as it would drop the price of Bitcoin to zero
Yeah, a person that can steal money is totally worried about their stolen money to be worth less than it was before. You can literally dump hundreds of millions worth per day yof BTC you fucking moron, no person would not take that chance if they could.
> Luckily for you the profit of the miners is keeping them from doing this, but if they ever decide to kill Bitcoin they can.
Wrong, the best they could come up with is Bcash, but because you literally have a king in Jihan and you have been convinced their rule the network it is useless to debate with you. You literally trust miners at this point, you literally see them as your central bank, you have been cucked out of a decentralized network with nigger propaganda and I have not a shred of sympathy for you. Keep being a nigger and buy as much BCH as you can, take out loans and shit. Stay retarded and poor user.

>if I keep moving the goalposts and changing up my words I win
fucking niggers

segwit undeniably gives miners the opportunity to arbitrarily agree to mine blocks while no releasing witness data. That creates a conflict of interest that doesn't exist without segwit. Although it hasn't happened it is possible and the person that could most easily do it is Jihan (who could do it and then say bitcoin cash is bitcoin)

so what you are saying is you trust jihan not to take advantage of this vulnerability that segwit causes which would simultaneously allow him to sell your btc for more bch and confirm his assertion that btc is bch

>segwit undeniably gives miners the opportunity to arbitrarily agree to mine blocks while no releasing witness data.
just because you keep saying it does not make it true cuck
>so what you are saying is you trust jihan not to take advantage of this vulnerability
I don't have to trust Jihan because he was so powerless in taking over BTC that he had to premine his own shitcoin and sell it to cucks like you. You are the one that thinks Jihan owns shit, to me he is a cuck that failed to do what he wanted and always will fail

BTC uses SHA-256 hashing algorithm, while LTC uses s-crypt algorithm. What is BeeCash algorithm?

Here's the TLDR if anyone missed it:
>FUCKING ILLITERATE NIGGER
>uneducated mongoloid
>lol u cant even read XD
>BCASH
>fucking moron
>cuck
>fucking moron
>BCASH BCASH
>YOU YOU YOU
>KEKED
>nigger propoganda
>nigger
>retard
Really convinced me that a coin which has only lost adoption is useful and that the points made aren't an issue.

I agree it's not true because I'm saying it but because that's what segwit does it segregates the witness data.

there is no way of stopping jihan and/or roger from mining blocks without witness data which would allow them to steal your btc. That situation is not possible without segwit