I created a thread called "high transaction fees" and it was deleted, disappeared, censored or what ever you prefer to call it. I mentioned that earlier in this thread as well. Go back and look.
I don't appreciate a cad like you implying I am lying. I am telling the truth, so go stuff it! JERK!
Topic: The consensus dead end. (Read 1347 times)
I created a thread about transaction fees and bitcoin cash and to my surprise and disappointment it was censored.
I have not seen you talk about bitcoin transaction fees even once. You only mention the word "transaction fees" then talk about the shitcoin known as bitcoin cash. Obviously when you talk about altcoins your topic belongs to altcoin board and will be moved which doesn't seem to have happened to you so I don't know what "censor" you are talking about: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/high-transaction-fees-5332700
I created a thread about transaction fees and bitcoin cash and to my surprise and disappointment it was censored. That angered me very much and that is what led to me posting on here about it instead. It was a last resort. Blame the jerks who complained about my thread and got it deleted. It didn't have to come to this.
Thank you for the information. That might give me the info I was seeking. BTW, remind others on here from time to time that censoring threads without just cause is not a solution. It spilled over to your thread and it was completely avoidable.
I wish you all well.
Thank you for the information. That might give me the info I was seeking. BTW, remind others on here from time to time that censoring threads without just cause is not a solution. It spilled over to your thread and it was completely avoidable.
I wish you all well.
There must be a downside or everybody would use the lightning network.
It adds an extra level of complication for the average user (IMO) and it is accepted by dramatically few stores. These are the only disadvantages I observe with LN. It's under development, but it's being implemented.
Here's some nice links to watch:
- Basics of the Lightning Network
- The Lightning Network FAQ
- Electrum Lightning Network walkthrough (if you're using electrum)
I'd please you, now, to stop double posting and derailing this thread with posts related to forks of Bitcoin. The main topic of this thread is the consensus' future, or as I call it, the dead end. We've already gone way too off-topic. You're free to create a thread explaining why Bitcoin Cash is a better option than Bitcoin.
There must be a downside or everybody would use the lightning network.
What is the catch?
What is the catch?
Black hat said at least $5 transaction fee for $100.
Would you mind quoting me, to see where exactly did I say that?If there is an exception he omitted he should own up to it and provide that source of information instead of pretending he gave me a different figure.
Everyone can pay 1 satoshi for an off-chain transaction, as long as they'll pay two on-chain transactions for opening and closing a channel. This means that unlimited transactions between two parties can be made, by only broadcasting two transcations.And it gets better! Lightning nodes can connect with each other forming a network of users that transact off-chainly. Not strictly to two parties!
When there is no coin to mine from bitcoin you will have the same problem. All incentive will be transaction fees.
What then?
What then?
Bitcoin Cash overtook Litecoin in market cap for 10th place.
As it moves up to 9th and then 8th maybe the people here engaging in "group think" will see I am right.
Hypothetical vulnerabilities are far from convincing. That is true of all cryptocurrencies.
I'll let Bitcoin Cash's performance speak for itself. While most people on here will let themselves be fooled by their confirmation bias support group the smart people will buy Bitcoin Cash before it moves up to the top 5 in market cap and eventually #2
Are you all waiting for it to be too late? Every transaction leads to an increase in market cap. Low transaction fees lead to more transactions. Hello! Ignore flawless logic at your own risk of losing out on a great deal.
Bitcoin Cash is NOT centralized. It is merely less decentralized than Bitcoin. The lying and the condoning of that lie says a lot about the lack of honesty from Bitcoin loyalists on here. You can resume your groupthink or you can buy Bitcoin Cash and get a great price. You all like money, right?
As it moves up to 9th and then 8th maybe the people here engaging in "group think" will see I am right.
Hypothetical vulnerabilities are far from convincing. That is true of all cryptocurrencies.
I'll let Bitcoin Cash's performance speak for itself. While most people on here will let themselves be fooled by their confirmation bias support group the smart people will buy Bitcoin Cash before it moves up to the top 5 in market cap and eventually #2
Are you all waiting for it to be too late? Every transaction leads to an increase in market cap. Low transaction fees lead to more transactions. Hello! Ignore flawless logic at your own risk of losing out on a great deal.
Bitcoin Cash is NOT centralized. It is merely less decentralized than Bitcoin. The lying and the condoning of that lie says a lot about the lack of honesty from Bitcoin loyalists on here. You can resume your groupthink or you can buy Bitcoin Cash and get a great price. You all like money, right?
So you a newbie want to argue the case for BCH as a superior coin to BTC.
What happens if a larger BTC miner wants to attack BCH today. How would BCH defend itself.
BCH has 2.48 eh
BTC has 161.23 eh
bitmain has enough firepower to 51% BCH right here right now.
no known entity has enough firepower to do that to BTC right here right now.
BTW I am pro pow and don't care very much as to what pow coins win.
Anyone that fears bch winning can simply buy 1 bch or 5 bch from their btc holdings.
Why not hold
10000 Doge
10 LTC
1 Eth
3 BCH
and 1 BTC.
or whatever ratio you want.
I can argue against
the ETH ------ Mr V dies this make a war for Eth control
the BCH ------ Bitmain attacks it and double spends it to death.
With that above easy to happen
DOGE/LTC
BTC
are not that subject to 51% attacks as of today.
and none of them care about a death of any individual.
So why not hold some
DOGE
LTC
BTC
Especially if you mine it.
All I am asking for is your sources of information. If you cannot provide any why should I believe you? Would you take my word for it if I made assertions?
Black hat said at least $5 transaction fee for $100. If there is an exception he omitted he should own up to it and provide that source of information instead of pretending he gave me a different figure.
Black hat said at least $5 transaction fee for $100. If there is an exception he omitted he should own up to it and provide that source of information instead of pretending he gave me a different figure.
No source of information then.
To the last poster: You could find a source of information written by a reputable computer scientist. Your unwilling to do so is suspect. Perhaps people are just making up crap to obfuscate.
To the last poster: You could find a source of information written by a reputable computer scientist. Your unwilling to do so is suspect. Perhaps people are just making up crap to obfuscate.
I've told you where you can find it. If you're incapable of locating the code repositories for the very project you claim to be knowledgeable about, that looks far more suspect.
EDA: https://github.com/Bitcoin-ABC/bitcoin-abc/search?q=emergency+difficulty+adjustment&type=
Miner tax/IFP: https://github.com/Bitcoin-ABC/bitcoin-abc/search?q=infrastructure+funding&type=
Black hat told me different.
“Black hat” had also told you to read what is the Lightning Network. Did you?
No source of information then.
To the last poster: You could find a source of information written by a reputable computer scientist. Your unwilling to do so is suspect. Perhaps people are just making up crap to obfuscate.
To the last poster: You could find a source of information written by a reputable computer scientist. Your unwilling to do so is suspect. Perhaps people are just making up crap to obfuscate.
What is your source of information?
You can find two of the three, the EDA and the miner fees, within the BCH open source code itself. If you can't read code, you're going to have to take someone's word for it.
@Metal Brain,
You need to study more about what cryptocurrency is and what it is not. Unlike what you think it is not about low fees, never ever, it has nothing to do with cheap transactions, cryptocurrency is about immutability and censorship resistance, i.e. security.
A shitcoin with zero fees can't compete with bitcoin, it just can't because it is not secure, period.
You need to study more about what cryptocurrency is and what it is not. Unlike what you think it is not about low fees, never ever, it has nothing to do with cheap transactions, cryptocurrency is about immutability and censorship resistance, i.e. security.
A shitcoin with zero fees can't compete with bitcoin, it just can't because it is not secure, period.
All that matters here is how much it is going to cost you above that $100 to make the transaction to a foreign country. I think I paid about a 3% fee to Mastercard because it was a foreign country.
I once paid 1 satoshi for a LN transaction oversea. One! Can you do this with Mastercard?
If anybody here had the desire to buy cannabis seeds from a foreign country for $100 dollars and you had the choice between spending bitcoin or using a Mastercard which would you choose? And don't give me an irrelevant lecture about how Mastercard is not decentralized, it is a stupid point. You cannot buy Mastercard coin. DUH!
All that matters here is how much it is going to cost you above that $100 to make the transaction to a foreign country. I think I paid about a 3% fee to Mastercard because it was a foreign country.
This is about buying stuff, not speculating. Which would you all choose? Be honest.
Is it starting to sink in yet? Leave your "group think" behind for a minute and think about saving money.
All that matters here is how much it is going to cost you above that $100 to make the transaction to a foreign country. I think I paid about a 3% fee to Mastercard because it was a foreign country.
This is about buying stuff, not speculating. Which would you all choose? Be honest.
Is it starting to sink in yet? Leave your "group think" behind for a minute and think about saving money.
What is your source of information?
Excuse my skepticism, but assertions are not evidence that what you are saying is true. You could have been misinformed for all I know.
Excuse my skepticism, but assertions are not evidence that what you are saying is true. You could have been misinformed for all I know.
Bitcoin cash was an improvement on the flaws of Bitcoin, although not perfection as tradeoffs are necessary.
How is implementing an emergency difficulty adjustment because the network was too weak to survive its own launch an improvement? Having to cheat to hit the difficulty target is effectively an admission of failure.
How is a miner tax to fund development an improvement? I suppose if they are incapable of attracting sufficient developer talent with ethos and principles alone, it stands to reason money is the only avenue open to them.
How is falling victim to a successful hashrate attack by voluntarism.dev an improvement? I don't understand how anyone could still have faith in a chain that has proven it cannot maintain its alignment of incentives.
These aren't "tradeoffs". More like a cheap knockoff. These are signs of a compromised and vulnerable chain.
Bitcoin has the same problem once there is no more coin to mine. Transaction fees have to increase with both bitcoin and bitcoin cash in the long term.
False argument. Once fresh coin supply ends, Bitcoin Cash with its big block structure either loses hash rate or saturates blocks with cheap transactions, in the later case it eliminates small miners and falls in the centralization hole. For bitcoin, it is a whole different story as it needs to develop its fee market for high value transactions for surviving without escalating the centralization problem.
Don't get me wrong, it is not good news for Bitcoin to lose the small transaction market segment, but it is not a catastrophic threat, and we have time for dealing with it, actually, this trend enforces more scaling solutions to emerge either minor improvements like Taproot and Schnorr signatures or more disruptive and radical ones (hopefully).
On the other side of the island, in BCH camp they do not feel any pressure for smart scalability solutions because they are ok with large blocks and small fees, totally ignoring the centralization consequences of this scenario.
Bitcoin has the same problem once there is no more coin to mine. Transaction fees have to increase with both bitcoin and bitcoin cash in the long term. The other posters are continuing to be dishonest in calling bitcoin cash centralized. It is not completely centralized. Why are other posters on here so eager to lie about bitcoin cash? Can't they defend bitcoin without lying?
If people continue to lie they have already lost the debate. If they want to compare how decentralized bitcoin is relative to bitcoin cash that is fine, but falsely claiming bitcoin cash is centralized amounts to propaganda. Lying is an admission of failure and desperation.
Small transactions with bitcoin are impractical. It is a problem that will not go away. More decentralization also makes changes to correct that problem less likely to happen. The notion that consensus will solve everything in the future is a guess at best. Can enough people agree? Bitcoin hard forking into bitcoin cash is an example of the difficulty of bitcoin consensus to be reached.
Bitcoin was the first created cryptocurrency based on crude guesswork. Bitcoin cash was an improvement on the flaws of Bitcoin, although not perfection as tradeoffs are necessary. The assertion that bitcoin is more stable in the long term than bitcoin cash is ridiculous nonsense. The success of both in the long term is dependent on adjustment of transaction fees. Too many people here seem to be in deep denial of that.
It all comes down to which can evolve with the necessary changes better. A less centralized coin is probably the best bet. Decentralized sounds good until we find out consensus fails to be reached in the future. That is NOT a trivial issue, no matter how much bitcoin loyalists downplay it.
If people continue to lie they have already lost the debate. If they want to compare how decentralized bitcoin is relative to bitcoin cash that is fine, but falsely claiming bitcoin cash is centralized amounts to propaganda. Lying is an admission of failure and desperation.
Small transactions with bitcoin are impractical. It is a problem that will not go away. More decentralization also makes changes to correct that problem less likely to happen. The notion that consensus will solve everything in the future is a guess at best. Can enough people agree? Bitcoin hard forking into bitcoin cash is an example of the difficulty of bitcoin consensus to be reached.
Bitcoin was the first created cryptocurrency based on crude guesswork. Bitcoin cash was an improvement on the flaws of Bitcoin, although not perfection as tradeoffs are necessary. The assertion that bitcoin is more stable in the long term than bitcoin cash is ridiculous nonsense. The success of both in the long term is dependent on adjustment of transaction fees. Too many people here seem to be in deep denial of that.
It all comes down to which can evolve with the necessary changes better. A less centralized coin is probably the best bet. Decentralized sounds good until we find out consensus fails to be reached in the future. That is NOT a trivial issue, no matter how much bitcoin loyalists downplay it.
Jump to: