Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 16898. (Read 26713762 times)

Can't wait till a troll hacker replay attacks the BCC transactions on the real Bitcoin Blockchain. This will be firework. xD

Edit: Is RBF inplemented in BCC ? If yes, then this electrum manual (http://docs.electrum.org/en/latest/hardfork.html) won't work anymore. Just asking because I want to be the first to dump. 

Altcoin bagholders are losing their patience and hysterically try to create something out of nothing. They know segwit will make 99% of the alts obsolete.

Woahza, Jbreher.

You and your big blocker buddies seem really angry, to be devolving into new name calling and spin terms to attempt to perpetuate various made up bullshit.

Deep down inside, you and your buddies realize the fact of the matter is that the incorporation of segwit into the scaling dialogue was really the only way that your buddies were able to perk up the ears of major economic players in the bitcoin space, but yeah, you want to continue to whine about being a victim and being tricked into seg wit when the fact of the matter is that segwit is the better solution, the largely non-controversial solution and the imminent path forward to make bitcoin bigger and better.... so yeah, referring to the upcoming segwit implementation as a kind of junior is to attempt to continue to mislead with foney baloney.

Alex Jones probably.

Or an alien.

I repeat myself.

That's sure sounds interesting, I think I've seen someone's signature stating this aswell. Where did u learn about this?

i heard segwit is a trojan horse from illuminatis to take over bitcoin

Is there going to be a BCC fork no matter what conditions?  I heard some people say that it would only be if UASF split off or something?  I am a bit out of the loop.

I think the naming of Coins (is it an Altcoin, Bitcoin, or a Bitcoin derivative) is a tricky thing.
My gut reaction is to say:
1) Anything thing that forks with minority hashing power is an altcoin
2) Anything that forks with a majority of hash power is still bitcoin

But this creates problems because
1) What happens if the altcoin (minority hash power chain) later becomes the majority chain, do we relabel it.
2) This gives miners all the power to name what is Bitcoin, as users, businesses, exchanges (the majority) don't we get a say.

Because there are no pre-defined rules for any of this, only consensus, there is no escape from constantly fighting off hijack attempts by a vocal minority.

Not even close. LTC is a separate chain with a different POW algo.

Who is "you?"  Sounds like nonsense.  There are a lot of people in this space, and maybe you have identified part of the problem with some of the egos that seem to want to be "influential" in this decentralized space

AFAIK LTC was such a HF ?

I can certainly agree with the bolded sentence. And we don't know the level of support and consensus until the experiment is run. Fact is, in roughly coterminous timeframes, all Bitcoiners will be forced to choose between: Change A to Bitcoin; or Change B to Bitcoin. No option for Unchanged Bitcoin. So get off your high horse. If one is an alt before the fact, then so is the other.

Cheers!

Stop messing about with the semantics, clearly people are using slightly differing definitions of words here, ignoring that definition and then fighting about what it implies is meaningless.

I can create a hard fork of Bitcoin in a few minutes (tweak some params, change difficultly for that tweak, recompile , mine a block, and we have a hard fork).. it means nothing. The level of support and consensus is what is important.

True dat. OTOH, if you're counting on exchanging your free BCC for legacy BTC, and there is a line to do so, what will strangle your capacity is that these exchanges need to settle on the slow Bitcoin-Jr chain as well as the more capable Bitcoin Cash chain.

So you're pulling shit out of your ass. Got it.


I'll grant you that any editorial slant it may have is likely to be biased to the bigblock camp, yes. I don't really hang out on Bitcoin.com, so I don't really know.


Well, no. They are not replicating the bitcoin blockchain. They are building atop the bitcoin blockchain.


Wrong. It is precisely a fork of the bitcoin blockchain. Up to the fork, both chains identical. After the fork, two separate chains. A fork. Of the blockchain. Exactly.


Again, it is no more an altcoin than Bitcoin-Jr is an altcoin.


Because Bitcoin Cash has the transaction capacity required to support all the use cases that core threw overboard to sustain their Raspberry Pi fetish. More transaction capacity > more use cases > more utility > more use >  more value > more demand > higher price > more mining support > more security. Virtuous circle.

edit: or to look at it another way:

BTC has up to this point worked pretty well as a store of value*. But let's face it, for the last year, BTC has sucked as a medium of exchange. Some other crypto is going to fill that role. So you've got a choice:
1) Allow Bitcoin Cash to flourish, and take the role of default medium of exchange crypto. For this, you will be admirably rewarded. For you are starting off with one free BCC for every BTC you own.
2) Kill BCC, and some other crypto (LTC perhaps? Dash, god** forbid?) takes the medium of exchange role. Leaving you -- the BTC holder -- with nothing to show for it.

*oh yeah - that asterisk. Frankly, I believe that BTC earned its status as store of value only because its previous exceptional performance (now abandoned) as a medium of exchange. There's a good chance that BTC's store of value properties will be eroded by another coin that works great as medium of exchange, while still working well as a store of value. If so, wouldn't it be a good idea to own that other crypto?

** it's just an expression.

Just clarifying for the sake of truth. Depending upon the sequencing of things, Bitcoin Cash may be no more altcoin than is SegWit coin (which is somewhat playfully starting to be referred to as Bitcoin-Jr)

ANALYSIS: WHY AUGUST 3rd?
(micgoossens's prediction game)

Preliminaries. (Remarks, confessions.)
Any attempts at analysis for dates so far in the future can't be based on TA in the sense of shoulders, cups and double inverted Batmans. Even if it were a full Cow-and-Shepherd (one of the longest TA patterns), it wouldn't start before July 31st. We know the thing with crypto timings: a stock market's week is worth around a crypto halfday. So the analysis must be based on purely qualitative reasoning, no graphs or stuff.

Honestly, I would have preferred to choose Aug 4th: the time frame I am picturing in my mind is one day longer than what I bet on. Well, I'll work with what I have.

The Analysis.
August 1st will be inconsequential. Y2K, if you see what I mean. However, a few weak hands could and probably will be shaken. What this means is that later, as the price starts to run up - gingerly at first - those who panic sold or missed out the discounts will queue up for more - at a, ehm, slightly higher price of course. I'm not sure about the timing after August 1st, but I liked the 4th because it's Friday. Saturday and Sunday is bull-uga party (dolphins are whales too, as we all know). However, Aug 4th was taken, so I had to settle on the 3rd. I guess the cetacea will have to drink their champagne before the weekend breaks. The timing wasn't that crystal clear in my mind anyway.

TL;DR.
Fear of Aug 1st dissipates slowly while the wounded lick their wounds. New week, new life starting on Friday Thursday.

Just as long as I get my BCC to market first. Would hate to get stuck bag holding dust, even if it's free.

Edit: Doesn't look like I'll be the first though since I refuse to lock in my BTC at VIABTC, so I can trade in IOU virtual tokens.

I believe the pie in the sky premise of the various big blocker "hardfork" nut jobs is their fantastical belief that they are either going to be able to garner sufficient hashpower and economic nodes in order to become the longest bitcoin chain - and to really give bitcoin a run for its money - yet even when they attempt to trick folks into some kind of colluding path forward, they cannot accomplish such collusion based on actual facts and confidence that their way is the "better" way forward, and then they lose substantial portions of those - except some of the extensive baggage wielding nutjobs.

Even though we may have concluded that segwit was going to take some of the wind out of the sail of these arguments, a lot of these folks are so deluded in their thinking that they are never going to be satisfied, and it is likely that they are going to continue to battle for several more years on this same topic... it would be nice if they had a coin that they could just focus upon, but they are never going to be satisfied, so even that seems an insubstantial resolution.

Evidence? Not really, but I would be very surprised it isn't the case. Anyways, the point was Bitcoin.com is a biased news source about this issues, can we agree on that even if you share that same bias?

About the HF... so they are going to replicate the blockchain and then change a lot of rules and divert some (undetermined) hashrate to mine on that.... It is not exactly as if Bitcoin forked. It is an altcoin since its very inception and I think that is the only good thing they are doing about it. It would be irresponsible if it were a real HF more so after an agreement and even reaching 100% consensus on BTC.

If you mean it "forks" from a copy of the Bitcoin blockchain, well, yeah.

P.S.: WHY do you think "Bitcoin cash" is good for Bitcoin holders? I am talking mainly about PRICE impact here.