BitcoinCash got removed

Trips of truth also richard heart apologizes? Is this real life?
www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/825yor/richard_heart_today_i_apologize_to_bitcoincash

>BTC commies
>Jihan is literally a puppet of a communist country getting subsidized electricity
>"Heh it's a free market dood"

Unironically this

Jihan isn't BCH. BCH will live with or without him. Competition is good.

Ripple gets twice the FUD everyday lol

>a screenshot of a Veeky Forums post that was spammed in every thread and nobody ever replied too because it's entirely bullshit propaganda with no factual basis later posted to reddit and saved by you and now posted here again.
go back

I'd love a Bitcoin cash market fear. It's been boring lately I wanna long or short the shit out of it

There is evidence and you are afraid to DYOR.

And to respond to your image, you realize 'spamming' the mempool only works when there's a block limit, right? If your spam never gets added to a block, because blocks are full, you can spam forever and ever and ever and push up fees. If you have unlimited block size limit, any spam you try has will get added to another miner's wallet as they add your spam to a block to collect the fee. Instead of benefiting, you lose out on money. Spamming in this model is very very costly.

If you really think miners want this imaginary asic boost over huge fees from the masses, your thinking is ass backwards. At its peak, BTC had over $50 fees. Fees from TXs were higher than the bloody block reward. You really think your narrative holds up to reality?

cope harder

Bgone Btrash.

there is only one true king, ALL HAIL BTC!

Let this scum shitcoin bch die and suffer a slow and painful death!

>No other coin gets as much focused fud as BCH

With months of "BCH is the real bitcoin", "the flippening is going to happen", "operation dragonslayer", etc, BCH deserves every bit of FUD it gets.

Keep posting. Let people see your well thought out arguments. BCH is here to stay.

>unlimited block size

Not even cashies advocate this.

No there isn't we can go through these one by one for you. Miners are always the scapegoat for everything wrong according to blockstream and every little follower eats it up like candy. Bitmain opposing segwit and creating bitcoincash to keep profitability from asicboost is asinine especially now there is undeniable proof of how bad segwit actually was. Anyone with a brain would oppose segwit.
>spam the network to clog the mempool
This is said because they would be able to collect their own fees through mining. Except the fact that antpool doesn't actually mine every single block and most of those "spam" transactions never got included in a block anyways because the fee was so low.
>third blob
Hasn't aged well. How did the segwit upgrade turn out?
>get rid of core developers
Who wouldn't want this? Their centralized control over the repo takes away from bitcoins "decentralization".
>fifth point
Doesn't even include a fake resource

These arguments have all been said before I don't really give a shit anymore. If you have anything new i'd like to see it but all I can gather is the miners are being thrown under the bus so there's an excuse to move everything into offchain controlled enviroments, gimping the blockchain technology so it cannot grow.

everytime i check coinmcap and see some positive percentage difference between btc and bch it makes me smile. no matter if btc goes up or down, what counts is that this shitcoin bcash loses in relation to the king. it’s just an awfully bad product ripp off copy cat and it needs to die.

They advocate blocks never being full, which is essentially an unlimited blocksize model.
>but it costs less!
And bitcoin used to be 1/8th of a cent. Your point?

Yeah a majority do in the long term. Just because you set a blocksize limit does not mean the blocks will be that size. Miners can make the blocks whatever size is economically viable for them as long as there's enough transactions in the mempool.

>Hasn't aged well. How did the segwit upgrade turn out?

blog.trezor.io/rolling-out-trezor-wallet-segwit-segregated-witness-5700269debc5

medium.com/bitfinex/bitfinex-adopts-segwit-8e6c5d72fcf9

blog.coinbase.com/announcing-segwit-support-on-coinbase-4e51117857c7

segwit.party/charts/#

Say segwit reaches 100% adoption

Do you think it will fix high fee TXs during high usage? Trying to get a grasp on what you actually think

So it took half of a year and it still makes up less than 30% after a community outcry. And the network is no longer even being used so the problems have seemingly disappeared. But will reappear the second you go over a 1.3mb blocksize. This also took over 3 years to get implemented in the first place and was achieved by double crossing the big block community. How is this a success in anyway?

*you'll cap out at 1.3mb w/e you get the point

It will help keep fees manageable during the transition to LN. Fees will continue to climb over the long term as they replace coinbase inflation for miners.

Inflation served as a hidden or obscured fee, but the real txn cost will become increasingly apparent. This is okay. Bitcoin does not need to have low-txn cost for on chain txns. Using Bitcoin is worth these fees given the state of the world and what's going to happen this century.

What I actually believe is well-summarized here:

medium.com/@rusty_lightning/the-three-economic-eras-of-bitcoin-d43bf0cf058a

It couldn't even keep the fees manageable when there was 0 reason to move it anywhere

youtube.com/watch?v=Ug8NH67_EfE
Let this smug fuck explain exactly why your wrong.

Just trying to wrap my head around this. You're saying that Segwit will reduce fees before LN gets adopted, and then once LN is adopted we're good. How much do you think Segwit will reduce fees by? If LN gets 100% adoption, and actually works(lol), what will incentivize miners to mine once the block reward runs out?

The idea of scaling onchain is that it isnt increased fees per TX that carries the mining incentive, it's that there is a minimum, greater than 0 fee and with ever increasing adoption, miners collect more and more fees. Everyone can use it as cash, it costs barely anything and the more people who use it the more likely it'll be around in 100 years.

The problem with the BTC fork is they forgot that adoption was the key. They stifled adoption by keeping a 1mb limit, that in 2013 everyone agreed was a temporary limit, and instead alt coins took up the demand. There is a direct relationship between the 1mb limit being hit and BTC dropping from its 90% market dominance.

Do you really think BTC will be around in 10, 20, 100 years if it's already getting pushed out by alts because it can't scale to the demand? The market doesn't wait for segwit or LN.