Topic: [ANN] Bitcoin Cash - Pro on-chain scaling - Cheaper fees - page 371. (Read 704578 times)

I just buy yesterday for testing bitcoincash ,confirmation was fast.

are you joking
Bitcoin is bitcoin , forever and ever ..
BCH is NEW COIN that roger ver call it bitcoin! ok ! , here is free world anybody can call a frog , an elephant , because he is dreaming ..

then you must clarify which is true btc, why do you think the btc now is true btc while bch is just a fork, i think things will be reversed when bch has more uses and more hashes to support

If you believe 1MB and SW and LN and 2nd Layer are the correct solution - sure - you cannot understand

and one more word
I don't understand why some people want compare this coin to BTC
BCH is far from BTC , it like as you want compare a small Van to big Truck , it's not wisely
BCH has to walk long way like as BTC did already .. BTC has high fess right now but BCH can't be a BTC never ! this is hard to understand ?

I don't care BTC,BCH,... I'm not fan of them ,, I am trader and it was my analyse
i want just make profit and i don't care names

Well, I am not that happy about having to wait so long before I get 6 confirmations. After 20 min I only got 2. I still need 4. That's very slow. With Litecoin I got my 6 confirmations instantly. And Bitcoin Cash can't say that their network is congested. How on earth is it possible I need to wait this long for 6 confirmations ?

Super fan of this coin! HODL!

You are completely clueless. It is a good thing Bitcoin Cash exists. The Bitcoin lightning network is something that I don't trust. I mean, what is the purpose of blockchain and miners ? They have to validate transactions, right ? They need to verify that if I sent 1 BTC to Bob, that I own 1 BTC. But if you are not working onchain, this means transactions do not occur on the blockchain so miners can't verify this anymore. So how can BTC's limited supply be guaranteed offchain ?

Then the people behind BTC are the ones controlling the money and the mining power. You have to be a dufus betting against them. Sure, not everything is nice about how they are doing things. I am sure they don't want segwit in it because of the ASIC advantage that gets taken away. But look how Roger Ver is appearing on so many channels in the last weeks. He came on CNBC yesterday and the people at the table, even one of which has always supported Bitcoin, now claim that in the longterm Bitcoin Cash will be bigger than Bitcoin because the store of value market is much smaller than the payment market. And Roger Ver is planning to launch a Bitcoin Cash credit card so people can spend their money easily.

Now, that being said ... 2 days ago I sent Litecoin to an exchange, today I sent Bitcoin Cash to that same exchange. I received my Litecoin almost instantly. Bitcoin Cash however gets confirmed much slower. I am waiting 15 minutes and still only 1 confirmation received. I still need to get 5 extra confirmations. That's very slow also. Looks like Litecoin is at the winning end at the moment.

Absolutely ..
Obviously this is an organic pump

I see a crazy pump right now ..
Don't buy now you will lose your money

BCH was pulled up the angle of 90 degrees showing the slope, handsome, to 3,000 US dollars attack

Now there is a real battle at the Bithumb exchange for the level of 2000$ Just unbelievable 

Bitcoin pretty much sucks right now. It takes too long to complete transactions, and fees are ridiculously high. Sure, it's worth a lot, but what good is it to consumers if it isn't user friendly!

By the way, I don't own any Bitcoin Cash, but I am starting to consider it.  

BCH has been standing at 1700 US dollars point, you are only 10 times the BTC, but BCH pulled up very fast, has set up a position, I hope you can fly to heaven

Hey look Someone is trying to convince themselves they are BITCOIN, on the ALT coin board..lmao  hurry up and pump this so I can dump it for max profits thanks  Merry Christmas.

Hey look - there's an important lesson encased in this simple challenge. I like it.

Bitbobb,
You were referring "bancor" as the academic predecessor of Special Drawing Rights.
John Maynard Keynes and Ernst Friedrich Schumacher proposed the concept of supranational currency - bancor, that would replace gold in international trade. It was intended as an unit of account to value and clear trade flows, through the multilateral clearing system - International Clearing Union. Each nation would have a limit of bancor, corresponding to its share in global trade. The scope of bancor was to achieve balanced trade among countries and enforce multilateral economic relations - going from bilateral relations to economic regionalism. At that age, bilateral relations were represented among colonies and the metropole (United Kingdom or France) and the ICU implementation would have brought globalization faster.
Gold could have been exchanged for bancor, but not vice-versa. Bancor was never meant as value of store, like physical gold.
Export increases the bancor balance, import - decreases and the mechanism incentivizes a zero balance: the surplus would have been partially held/retained to the ICU Reserve Fund and the deficit would have led to devaluation of the national currency, to become export-competitive and bring the balance back to zero. Rather than being fined, a country would boost its export or import.
It supposed fixed exchange rate between bancor and each national currency. The rate would have been revised when the country crossed the limit of bancor - surplus countries should appreciate the currency, deficit countries - depreciate the currency.
Similar to actual IMF, indebted countries would be under severe financial discipline. Unlike the actual IMF, wealthy, surplus nations would also be under scrutiny and required to implement tight monetary policies.

Multilateral Clearing (Economica Journal, 1943): http://www.centerforneweconomics.org/documents/copy-e-f-schumacher-multilateral-clearing-economica-new-series-vol-10-no-38-may-1943-pp-15
Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bancor, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Clearing_Union

My opinion:
IMF has a broader scope than ICU would have had.
From my POV, IMF focuses more on financial stability rather than trade balance and emphasizes the role of international capital flows. IMF decisions are political decisions, because the SDR is an instrument of higher flexibility than bancor would have been and the strong bends rules to favor him. I tend to see bancor as a self-adjusting mechanism (even a smart-contract), where the decisions are made upon economic performance, not political influence.
It is unclear how would have changed the total amount of banco in response to global GDP increasing. Each country needs higher limit to meet increased export/import volume - either new bancors are issued according the global trade % increase, or each national currency buys less bancor, i.e. bancor become more valuable.
Another sweetspot of bancor for libertarians would be the detachment from any government money. Bancor would not depend on one or 5 currencies.

On one hand, ICU and bancor would have smoothened the income inequality among nations. On the other hand, it would have limited credit issuance and I strongly consider credit a good for the humanity. Debt has a lot of negative consequences when mishandled, but it also drives progress - allowing for expansion and setting higher goals to attain.

"when first inquiring [into] a thing start with the name"

the name:  SDR = stands for special drawing rights

from there we need more info.  Origin would be a perfect answer I also will accept historical references that predate formation of the UN for lesser credit.. lol.

the UN will tell you they were invented in 1969.  This is false.  Therefore any further discussion gets muddied if begun from a false premise..


I will release the history on SDR along with related documentation very soon if no one nails it.


      But let me take this opportunity to point out a small irony: bitcoin core dev trolls will tell you that seg wit coin is bitcoin just like the UN will tell you SDR was invented at the 1969 bretton woods meeting.  some core trolls will tell you that satoshi's paper needed re-write lol.  Whereas the UN simply wipes the internet of any reference not to their liking

Do they not know that a superior academic idea can supplant an inferior one?  Instead they will destroy a previous innovation and keep the name on the paper to fool future users?  That is called fraud.

An inquiry into a thing properly begins with the name.  However it does not end there..  the nature of the thing is also important to final understanding..

yeah... Bitbobb answered me in PM. Evidently, I made a false claim about the origin of the SDR. Accordingly, my answer was deemed unworthy. I wasn't clear that the origin of the SDR was a necessary part of the answer, but I'm fine with the outcome. Bitbobb's challenge, Bitbobb's rules.

Thanks tho.

(hey look - I'm a TLD!)

XD