Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 16798. (Read 26711605 times)

BCC is free money as of now..

So....  BTC is still at $2700... and BCC at $430?  Did I just make $40K of free money?  Thanks Roger Ver/Jihan Wu/ViaBTC

Then explain it to me, because your response adds nothing either.  

I'm sorry you're in such a foul mood today.

bcc is like herpes for btc lol
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIEvaqJ6DWs
Bruce Wanker on the Ethereum Hard Fork

Edit: Anyone has any cracked fork coins they want to unload: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2059611.0;topicseen

You have no point.  If someone is buying 100 pounds of crack rocks, it doesn't matter if he's paying with bitcoin or metals.  He would need to show up in person and utilize some type of security, otherwise he's operating solely on a reputation system or the word of the other person to send him the goods.  Your statement is completely irrelvant in comparing bitcoin and metals since it affects both the same.  But, my statement was OBVIOUSLY not referencing that type of counter party risk.  

If I own metals, a blackhole or something needs to hit the earth to destroy it.  There is no counter party risk.  If I own bitcoin, it's FULL of external actors and variables that can undermine the system and kill it.  Even innocuous so called "upgrades".  Maybe Luke Jr wants the block size to be 1 kilobyte while another guy wants it to be 20 gigs.  The fact that they don't agree can cause the system to implode or fracture.  Stop playing stupid and pretending bitcoin isn't full of external variables completely out of your control that cause huge counter party risk. 

As for buying stuff from other countries, bitcoin doesn't magically eliminate the need for sending stuff by boats.  You don't get to make believe there's always going to be a giant manufacturing plant in the sky called China where you send infinite amounts of digital US T-bills or bitcoin to, and China will be perfectly happy with accumulating an infinite stream of these worthless things and never want real world goods in return for them.  And no, you don't have to ship gold or silver to them to pay is because activities like this are handled by import/exporters that bring the goods your country doesn't produce to you already.  

You only have to transport metals between banks in your own country, and they're perfectly capable of doing that.

... yeah, all you've done here is make clear that you don't understand merged-mining without furthering the debate in the slightest.

So the combined sale of both BTC and BCH comes to over $3100.

Hahaha,  what is "Blockchair" ?     And they want us to take it seriously.   https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/blocks

I don't think miners will swing. When price settles down and exchanges accept deposits, can this coin maintain its current price? I don't think these guys will, maintaining it at this level will dip to their deepest pocket.

Now, now, stay civilized, guys. i´m back at 0.02 percent at just lending, but don´t underestimate the power of "compounding interest" Still have no idea, what bccchchcc is all about  

Szabo made the conjecture and asked if anyone wanted to help him code publically.  The burden was on him, and so his next step would be to provide empirical evidence through an experiment with an anonymous  paper that could be peer reviewed without the bias of knowing who wrote it.

Wait did you all forget how academics works?

Either chain adopting merged mining would be admitting defeat.  Merged mining implies you are deferring to the other chain as a source of truth/security.

A club membership where limited entry creates privilege and prestige. This can go right up to the level of multinational coalition.  But I don't like your question because it doesn't speak to my point.  People assume metcalfes law means the more people accessible to a network the more valueable it is.  This is not metcalfe law.  Metcalfes law is a formula that tells you how many possible connections can be made, the assumption that those connection imply value is asinine.

Think about a fax system.  What that would imply is that the very last person in the world to get a fax machine adds the value times every single person in the world.  But not everyone even sends faxes to each other and there would be no added value if we just start randomly faxing people.

metcalfes law is a measure of POTENTIAL value.  Yet there is nothing to say the value could be filled.  You could a water system for a city and that would create enormous value, but if you create 100 systems for the same city, you will cause more problems then you fix.

Notice Szabo use of the word potential and redundancies:

http://unenumerated.blogspot.ca/2014/10/transportation-divergence-and.html

Right, causes Ver's claim that increasing the tps and users implies more value is a childs view of economics.  Like why can't we just print more money for everyone (sound familiar (hint bch)?)

Furthermore the big block agenda fights for the average joe, average joe brings very little value to the network compared to, for example, two nations that want to settle on the block chain.  you need many many average joe's to matter value wise compared to international settlement. You can't weight the users the same.

If we used metcalfes law the way much of the community has misten it to be, you could just get everyone to start sending everyone bitcoins and we would all be rich because the price would skyrocket forever.

this is the calm before the storm ... you can't say you haven't been warned.

When the hashpower begins swinging from one chain to another it's going to get very messy and both coins will become unpredictable, unstable and at times very difficult to use. One logical conclusion out of this is when Bcash adopts merged-mining ... or the hashpower wars will drag on until the bitcoin landscape becomes derelict and eventually a failed experiment.

Edit: Bcash adopting merged-mining is probably unlikely given the dominance of Bitmain h/ware on that chain that needs ASICboost to retain profitability and segwit header code conflicts with this type of miner cheating/shortcut.

You keep saying this. Over and over again. But it's NOT TRUE AT ALL if you want to transact in PMs with someone not just down the street (like in another state or another country). Or want to transact a HUGE amount of PMs. In both scenarios which you need armored cars and middlemen seeking transport/transaction/storage fees.

You keep saying this. Over and over again. But it's NOT TRUE AT ALL if you want to transact in PMs with someone not just down the street (like in another state or another country). Or want to transact a HUGE amount of PMs. In both scenarios which you need armored cars and middlemen seeking transport/transaction/storage fees.

You keep saying this. Over and over again. But it's NOT TRUE AT ALL if you want to transact in PMs with someone not just down the street (like in another state or another country). Or want to transact a HUGE amount of PMs. In both scenarios which you need armored cars and middlemen seeking transport/transaction/storage fees.

You keep saying this. Over and over again. But it's NOT TRUE AT ALL if you want to transact in PMs with someone not just down the street (like in another state or another country). Or want to transact a HUGE amount of PMs. In both scenarios which you need armored cars and middlemen seeking transport/transaction/storage fees.

You keep saying this. Over and over again. But it's NOT TRUE AT ALL if you want to transact in PMs with someone not just down the street (like in another state or another country). Or want to transact a HUGE amount of PMs. In both scenarios which you need armored cars and middlemen seeking transport/transaction/storage fees.

You keep saying this. Over and over again. But it's NOT TRUE AT ALL if you want to transact in PMs with someone not just down the street (like in another state or another country). Or want to transact a HUGE amount of PMs. In both scenarios which you need armored cars and middlemen seeking transport/transaction/storage fees.

(Yes r0ach, I've just repeated myself over and over again. Like you seem to be fond of doing.)

And BCC is already 3rd @ coinmarketcap, already passed Ripple.
Funny that they're using the Bittrex price, although it's not possible to deposit BCC on Bittrex, I tried and they show "BCC wallet is under maintenance".

So scammy...

I'm not from india you dumb mutt. Nothing you have said so far is correct.  You just keep repeating it.  And I'm not parroting szabo I'm reference his explanations and citing them and quoting them and explaining them.

After seeing every other industry try to low labor costs and outsource to India, the computer graphics industry tried it and it totally failed because Indians were unable to compete in art or creativity.  Now here we have traincarswreck/sidhujag from India who is unable to do anything besides parrot Nick Szabo, one of the ringleaders of the Ethereum scam while pretending he's the word of god.  If you're unable to explain or back some type of view on your own, don't bother posting.

This will be my final reply to you until you say something useful, backed up by something more substantial than "you are wrong, you little five year old idiot you". We are not talking about "some network", we are talking about bitcoin. So go on and explain.