Topic: [ANN] Bitcoin Cash - Pro on-chain scaling - Cheaper fees - page 363. (Read 704412 times)
Guys be strong, dont be shakin out here...
BCH is at bottom....
Buy & Hodl
BCH is at bottom....
Buy & Hodl
Agree!
it is holding strong(even slightly increasing) with BTC rises. Previously it drops heavily when BTC rises heavily but is now holding strong which is a good sign.
Guys be strong, dont be shakin out here...
BCH is at bottom....
Buy & Hodl
BCH is at bottom....
Buy & Hodl
From one beggar to all of you beggars, I was just trying to open Bitcoincash.org to see a 403 forbidden page, why did you block my country from accessing the real decentralized Bitcoin? what decentralized currency forbids people from visiting their site?
Where is emperor Wu? I need to beg him, don't sell yourself to US government yet, where is Satoshi? I need to beg him, why did you let these CIA agents kill you?
Where is emperor Wu? I need to beg him, don't sell yourself to US government yet, where is Satoshi? I need to beg him, why did you let these CIA agents kill you?
You can VPN to get access to that website I have no problem to access there. Maybe there was some kind of hosting problem that could be reason of that error.
I can VPN to get to Paypal, VPN to get to the blocked games (note, these beggars blocked games for my IP) decentralized means no body gets locked out of the *game, this blocking means some body is in charge. I might be a low life beggar, a no body, but I'm not idiot.
Proof that Bitcoin Cash might be added to Coinbase
They have api call for BCH: https://api.coinbase.com/v2/exchange-rates?currency=BCH
This will get you .json file which you can open with notepad type of software
If you try this for some other currency which is not in coinbase it isnt working!
They have api call for BCH: https://api.coinbase.com/v2/exchange-rates?currency=BCH
This will get you .json file which you can open with notepad type of software
If you try this for some other currency which is not in coinbase it isnt working!
Coinbase is carrying BCH from january this is very very old news
Proof that Bitcoin Cash might be added to Coinbase
They have api call for BCH: https://api.coinbase.com/v2/exchange-rates?currency=BCH
This will get you .json file which you can open with notepad type of software
If you try this for some other currency which is not in coinbase it isnt working!
They have api call for BCH: https://api.coinbase.com/v2/exchange-rates?currency=BCH
This will get you .json file which you can open with notepad type of software
If you try this for some other currency which is not in coinbase it isnt working!
What is the best BCH ios wallet to download?
Sadly Bitcoin is broken.
It's basically unusable as a peer to peer platform which was the whole damn point.
I tried to transfer $600 of BTC and still unconfirmed.
BTC's utility is wrecked.
It's basically unusable as a peer to peer platform which was the whole damn point.
I tried to transfer $600 of BTC and still unconfirmed.
BTC's utility is wrecked.
And how do you know BCH won't have similar issues once blocks get full ?
BTC is creating off chain solutions for tiny transactions that have no place on chain there will be a block increase eventually but right now it's about optimising the available space then increasing the required resources afterwards
How would you feel if say microsoft used this approach and didn't optimise windows for more efficient use of RAM/HDD space so your computer would require you to have a minimum of 512 GB RAM and 10 TB HDD just to start up with poor performance over just making it more efficient
Sadly Bitcoin is broken.
It's basically unusable as a peer to peer platform which was the whole damn point.
I tried to transfer $600 of BTC and still unconfirmed.
BTC's utility is wrecked.
It's basically unusable as a peer to peer platform which was the whole damn point.
I tried to transfer $600 of BTC and still unconfirmed.
BTC's utility is wrecked.
Yes, the current rate to ensure a 1 input 1 output segwit tx goes through quickly is $10.00. Maybe, if your moving around 1000s of dollars worth, that is a deal; but for smaller transactions, that's a ripoff.
Sadly Bitcoin is broken.
It's basically unusable as a peer to peer platform which was the whole damn point.
I tried to transfer $600 of BTC and still unconfirmed.
BTC's utility is wrecked.
It's basically unusable as a peer to peer platform which was the whole damn point.
I tried to transfer $600 of BTC and still unconfirmed.
BTC's utility is wrecked.
BCH is undervalued a lot right now.
usual whale games, supress the gd coin, (shake out the weak at low prices)...pump a few other coins(lure in the weak at high prices)then....BAM...other coins dump and all the profits go into buy cheap BCH
Check out this block! 2MB, 1096 txs!!
That's nothing to boast about Bitcoin averages over 2000 transactions in a 1MB block so this block has to have been bloated by some huge transactions by 400%
Is bitpay active on BCH yet because they bloat transactions by huge amounts by putting information in the OP_RETURN probably to get around the transaction malleability bug that using segwit fixes
After watching this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SJm2ep3X_M&feature=youtu.be
I have come to the conclusion that on-chain scaling is indeed feasible. My previous objections were that it takes pools too long to verify transactions. Therefore, 1GB blocks would result in many empty blocks being mined.
I see no scenario where that would be a consequence. Can you explain? For that matter, how does one quantify 'too many empty blocks'? As long as all transactions are processed with reasonable alacrity, what does the block fullness matter?
Currently, there is a bottleneck in the way nodes need to verify transaction included in the previous block before they start including transactions in the new block they are working on. This is why empty blocks are frequently mined if they arrive within about 30 seconds of the previous block. 1GB blocks would compound this bottleneck 1000x. However, nChain is working on ways to relieve the bottleneck. Therefore, my objection would be thwarted.
Again, I fail to see why this is a problem.
I actually had a significant discussion about a year ago with the author of the leading independent mining SW about this very issue. Though the motivating factor was the nonsense about nonlinear hash time for aberrant transactions. Yes, there is a significant opportunity to improve the threading model within leading Bitcoin clients.
However, I don't see how your reply addresses my question. As long as all transactions are processed with reasonable alacrity, what does the block fullness matter?
At this time, I believe this would cause a barrier to entry for small start ups that require a full node be run. (New exchanges, information services, mining pools etc.)
If a startup can't lose 0.1 BTC in the noise of its annual CapEx budget, it is likely to be a non-entity anyhow.
According to Craig Wright, the initial setup would be $20,000. If I wanted to start a block explorer or a sight like fork.lol, that's quite an outlay, especially since it extremely difficult to be able monetize such an informational sight, to make up the costs. I enjoy these information sights and don't deem them "non-entities."
I have heard Craig Wright speak of the $20K figure. But I have not heard him speak of it as a minimum viable investment - merely exemplary. More importantly, $20K (I note that this is a depreciating asset with a useful life exceeding one year) is a drop in the bucket for any real business. Crippling Bitcoin in order to save paying a $5/year subscription to access fork.lol's data is the wrong decision.
Perhaps $5/year is trifling to you, but to a minnow like me who constantly consults many information sight, it starts to add up. This would be even more of a burden to the millions of unbanked people Craig Wright wants to help. Also, I suspect many sights would have alternate ways to monetize. I would find it particular irritating to have to watch a 30 second ad or have the web page try to make my computer mine Monero for them. (something which my AV blocks, thank god.)
From one beggar to all of you beggars, I was just trying to open Bitcoincash.org to see a 403 forbidden page, why did you block my country from accessing the real decentralized Bitcoin? what decentralized currency forbids people from visiting their site?
Where is emperor Wu? I need to beg him, don't sell yourself to US government yet, where is Satoshi? I need to beg him, why did you let these CIA agents kill you?
Where is emperor Wu? I need to beg him, don't sell yourself to US government yet, where is Satoshi? I need to beg him, why did you let these CIA agents kill you?
You can VPN to get access to that website I have no problem to access there. Maybe there was some kind of hosting problem that could be reason of that error.
Currently standing at $ 1,500 or more steadily, with the expansion of the market value of bitcoin, I would like BCH to 3000 US dollars to stop, because behind DASH, Ethereum is chasing it
From one beggar to all of you beggars, I was just trying to open Bitcoincash.org to see a 403 forbidden page, why did you block my country from accessing the real decentralized Bitcoin? what decentralized currency forbids people from visiting their site?
Where is emperor Wu? I need to beg him, don't sell yourself to US government yet, where is Satoshi? I need to beg him, why did you let these CIA agents kill you?
Where is emperor Wu? I need to beg him, don't sell yourself to US government yet, where is Satoshi? I need to beg him, why did you let these CIA agents kill you?
Yes, there is the capability of doing a 51% attack on Bitcoin Cash with the current available hash for SHA-256D. However, the person most likely to be able to pull that off at the moment is Jihan Wu. Since he is a big supporter of Bitcoin Cash, there is probably a bigger chance that I will win the jackpot on Powerball 52 times in a row.
I am more concerned about the backdoor most recent Antminers have.I also discard the possibility of a Bitcoin Cash 51% attack (no interest of the founding party to hurt the business), still can imagine an attempt to attack the Bitcoin chain - pools affiliated to Bitmain have 48-55% of total hashrate on average.
If the Antbleed backdoor is activated, Bitmain can switch off selectively a large portion of the SHA256D network and the online miners will have leverage to perform a 51% attack.
With 51% of net hashrate it will be still very difficult to attack Bitcoin network. You need much more, ideally ~80-90% to solve a lot of blocks in a row.
Bitcoin Cash is not going to have a lot of full nodes if things go their way. In order to scale anywhere close to Visa, on chain, as appears to be their goal, a enterprise would need access to equipment capable of storing at least 56 TB of data per year. Probably at least quadruple that, since you want to properly index the data and have proper back ups. A casual user would need to run an SPV client.
For the umpteenth time - Bitcoin Cash has no reason to support Visa-scale transaction volume until such time as demand for transactions reaches Visa scale (is that a tautology?). If we somehow hit that next year, I'll be more than happy to store 56 TB of data that year. Of course, even in the most wildly optimistic scenario, Visa-scale demand is still several years off.
Perhaps you need to discuss this with Craig Wright on Twitter then. It appears nChain is working hard to bring this capacity to reality in 2018, needed or not.
Capacity is not consumption.
After watching this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SJm2ep3X_M&feature=youtu.be
I have come to the conclusion that on-chain scaling is indeed feasible. My previous objections were that it takes pools too long to verify transactions. Therefore, 1GB blocks would result in many empty blocks being mined.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SJm2ep3X_M&feature=youtu.be
I have come to the conclusion that on-chain scaling is indeed feasible. My previous objections were that it takes pools too long to verify transactions. Therefore, 1GB blocks would result in many empty blocks being mined.
I see no scenario where that would be a consequence. Can you explain? For that matter, how does one quantify 'too many empty blocks'? As long as all transactions are processed with reasonable alacrity, what does the block fullness matter?
Currently, there is a bottleneck in the way nodes need to verify transaction included in the previous block before they start including transactions in the new block they are working on. This is why empty blocks are frequently mined if they arrive within about 30 seconds of the previous block. 1GB blocks would compound this bottleneck 1000x. However, nChain is working on ways to relieve the bottleneck. Therefore, my objection would be thwarted.
Again, I fail to see why this is a problem.
I actually had a significant discussion about a year ago with the author of the leading independent mining SW about this very issue. Though the motivating factor was the nonsense about nonlinear hash time for aberrant transactions. Yes, there is a significant opportunity to improve the threading model within leading Bitcoin clients.
However, I don't see how your reply addresses my question. As long as all transactions are processed with reasonable alacrity, what does the block fullness matter?
However, I still have misgivings about 1 GB blocks since this would require a node to have the storage capacity of over 50tb per year.
Other than to repeat that we will not consume that much storage until there is actual demand for it, I would like to point out the 50 TB of storage -- today -- costs less than 0.1 BTC (~$1650 USD at standard retail).
At this time, I believe this would cause a barrier to entry for small start ups that require a full node be run. (New exchanges, information services, mining pools etc.)
If a startup can't lose 0.1 BTC in the noise of its annual CapEx budget, it is likely to be a non-entity anyhow.
According to Craig Wright, the initial setup would be $20,000. If I wanted to start a block explorer or a sight like fork.lol, that's quite an outlay, especially since it extremely difficult to be able monetize such an informational sight, to make up the costs. I enjoy these information sights and don't deem them "non-entities."
I have heard Craig Wright speak of the $20K figure. But I have not heard him speak of it as a minimum viable investment - merely exemplary. More importantly, $20K (I note that this is a depreciating asset with a useful life exceeding one year) is a drop in the bucket for any real business. Crippling Bitcoin in order to save paying a $5/year subscription to access fork.lol's data is the wrong decision.
BTC is approaching 20k mark.
If it can stand steadily at that price, more growth is predictable.
100%
I hope it will surge again soon.
It is really a hard time for me to hold bitcoin still.
BTC is approaching 20k mark.
If it can stand steadily at that price, more growth is predictable.
Nope.It's going to go back to about 10k and lower and sit there for long time,maybe years until peeps who get burned or lose patience dump at a loss.This whole climb is only an institutional whale pump and nothing else.
Everycoins below 1$ skyrocketing , ADa Tron Xvg bts ....
BCH is too expensive to be pumped
BCH is too expensive to be pumped
BTC is 10 times more expensive than BCH and is pumped like crazy, so apparently the price isn't that important for pumpers
Since BTC's utility is now degraded, its survival seems to depend solely on high price and high fees which keep attracting miners.
BTC is approaching 20k mark.
If it can stand steadily at that price, more growth is predictable.
Jump to: