[xShadowAlk]

I could do a whole essay on this but I won't because I might just be wasting both of our times with me typing something you will disagree with immediately.

Basically:
-Bitcoin is no longer truly "open source"; its code is public, but only select few individuals at a company called Blockstream may work on the code (lead developer has NO CODING EXPERIENCE)
-Satoshi originally wanted bigger blocks; if you read his original statements he says that bigger blocks were the way for Bitcoin to scale (one Bitcoin developer tweeted on Twitter that Bitcoin should HALVE the blocksize!)
-Bitcoin is losing adoption; many companies have dropped Bitcoin as a payment option, including Steam
-LN solves nothing; Lightning Networks is a very complicated solution to a simple problem, it costs a fee to open a channel, and the fee sets a limit on the amount of Bitcoin that can be sent through the channel. This is nonrefillable, once you reach the limit you must pay a fee to close the channel and pay another fee to reopen the channel.
-LN is unusable for microtransactions; based on math I saw in a Reddit post (so take with a grain of salt) it takes a transfer of 167 bitcoins over LN to be less than BCH Fees. Nice if you want to buy a couple of lambos. Not so nice if you just want a cup of coffee.

Meanwhile:
-Bitcoin cash is open source
-BCH is fulfilling satoshis dream of bigger blocks
-BCH is constantly being added by new vendors
-BCH can be used for microtransactions

If you disagree with me, you probably got all your information from the Bitcoin Core community.

[mvmt]

Now I'm really starting to think that you are just trolling.

[th3c0rrupt3d0n3]

After doing some research about the topic, I came to the conclusion that Bitcoin overall is fucked and doomed. I really don't see the lighting network being adopted, it has way too many flaws. But Jihan's playground coin isn't the solution either. There are simply too many better alternatives than Bitcoin and Bcash.

The main winner of the BTC scaling problem is going to be an altcoin, probably Ethereum.

[abstractbeanfactory]

-Bitcoin is no longer truly "open source"; its code is public, but only select few individuals at a company called Blockstream may work on the code (lead developer has NO CODING EXPERIENCE)

This is nonsense. Bitcoin's developers are some of the friendliest and most approachable people I've met on the internet. It's true that Blockstream employ people to work on Bitcoin, but that doesn't mean that you can't join in too.

-Satoshi originally wanted bigger blocks; if you read his original statements he says that bigger blocks were the way for Bitcoin to scale (one Bitcoin developer tweeted on Twitter that Bitcoin should HALVE the blocksize!)

Satoshi was the one to add the block size limit 😧 . But more importantly, Satoshi's vision can go suck a dick, he's not around anymore. I suggest that you read "A Cypherpunk's Manifesto".

-Bitcoin is losing adoption; many companies have dropped Bitcoin as a payment option, including Steam

Sadly this is true.

-LN solves nothing; Lightning Networks is a very complicated solution to a simple problem, it costs a fee to open a channel, and the fee sets a limit on the amount of Bitcoin that can be sent through the channel. This is nonrefillable, once you reach the limit you must pay a fee to close the channel and pay another fee to reopen the channel.

You should think about it more as moving funds on and off the Lightning Network (like having two wallets), rather than opening and closing channels.

-LN is unusable for microtransactions; based on math I saw in a Reddit post (so take with a grain of salt) it takes a transfer of 167 bitcoins over LN to be less than BCH Fees. Nice if you want to buy a couple of lambos. Not so nice if you just want a cup of coffee.

Well... do you have a source for that?

If you disagree with me, you probably got all your information from the Bitcoin Core community.

It's better than getting all of your information from a pathological liar (CSW) and Roger Ver.

[God]

I love how you just point out the advantages of having bigger blocksizes but don't consider the disadvantages that come with it. What about the centralisation?

[minimalist]

Bitcoin is no longer truly "open source"; its code is public, but only select few individuals at a company called Blockstream may work on the code (lead developer has NO CODING EXPERIENCE)

That's strange, I'm close with a few contributors to Bitcoin and it's doubtful that they're employed by Blockstream...clearly you don't understand how Github organizations or project management works.

-Satoshi originally wanted bigger blocks; if you read his original statements he says that bigger blocks were the way for Bitcoin to scale (one Bitcoin developer tweeted on Twitter that Bitcoin should HALVE the blocksize!)
-Bitcoin is losing adoption; many companies have dropped Bitcoin as a payment option, including Steam

Big blocks are possible was the response. The context is important as he replied in a thread regarding increasing the block size to scale Bitcoin. Merchants dropping support is an obvious response to the perceptibly high fees at the time as well as BitPay's crippled fee structure/estimations which REMAIN cripped to this day.

-LN solves nothing; Lightning Networks is a very complicated solution to a simple problem, it costs a fee to open a channel, and the fee sets a limit on the amount of Bitcoin that can be sent through the channel. This is nonrefillable, once you reach the limit you must pay a fee to close the channel and pay another fee to reopen the channel.

Channels can be replenished using fiat gateways with existing services. There's no reason why you should have to settle a channel with this in mind.

-LN is unusable for microtransactions; based on math I saw in a Reddit post (so take with a grain of salt) it takes a transfer of 167 bitcoins over LN to be less than BCH Fees. Nice if you want to buy a couple of lambos. Not so nice if you just want a cup of coffee.

Meanwhile:
-Bitcoin cash is open source

Hm...
https://github.com/Bitcoin-ABC/bitcoin-a...-07&type=c
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/graph...-08&type=c
Three individuals contributing the bulk of all commits in 2018 in the case of BCC versus over a dozen contributing the bulk of all commits in 2018 in the case of Bitcoin Core.

-BCH is constantly being added by new vendors
-BCH can be used for microtransactions

BCC's recent celebrations have been existing Bitcoin ATMs accepting BCC, local store owners accepting BCC, and/or BitPay adding support for BCC. None of the above are unique to BCC.

If you disagree with me, you probably got all your information from the Bitcoin Core community.

I'm sorry you feel that way.

[xShadowAlk]

This is nonsense. Bitcoin's developers are some of the friendliest and most approachable people I've met on the internet. It's true that Blockstream employ people to work on Bitcoin, but that doesn't mean that you can't join in too.


Satoshi was the one to add the block size limit 😧 . But more importantly, Satoshi's vision can go suck a dick, he's not around anymore. I suggest that you read "A Cypherpunk's Manifesto".


Sadly this is true.


You should think about it more as moving funds on and off the Lightning Network (like having two wallets), rather than opening and closing channels.


Well... do you have a source for that?


It's better than getting all of your information from a pathological liar (CSW) and Roger Ver.

Well I actually do agree with you on several points. I never said that Bitcoin contributers were mean, many of them actually know a lot about what they are doing, it's just that Blockstream is constantly pushing their own agenda a.k.a. Lightning Networks and refuse other suggestions.

Also Satoshi added a block limit because if there was no block limit miners could produce bigger blocks than other miners and cause a fork. You are right that bigger blocks don't have to be the way to scale and causes more centralization.

Also we will see how LN works out. If it manages to be successful we will see Bitcoin become the future, but I don't really know how it will work out.

Also fuck Craig Wright, there's no way this idiot is Satoshi. I do want to point out that Vitalik Buterin does support Bitcoin Cash as well though.

[abstractbeanfactory]

Also we will see how LN works out. If it manages to be successful we will see Bitcoin become the future, but I don't really know how it will work out.

Yep, we'll just have to wait and see how good (or bad) the Lightning Network is.

Also fuck Craig Wright, there's no way this idiot is Satoshi. I do want to point out that Vitalik Buterin does support Bitcoin Cash as well though.

I don't hate Bitcoin Cash either. I find it mildly annoying that it's named Bitcoin Cash, but other than that it's all good.

[SIM-1589588]

OP, everything else except bitcoin cash is the future. It's a fork god dammnit, not a new tech.

[Flyrect]

OP sold all his crypto
Whateever he says should not even be considered

[Orgy]

It's a fork god dammnit, not a new tech.

very stupid viewpoint fyi

[SIM-1589588]

very stupid viewpoint fyi

Atleast it forced you to come out from your secret shell. Where you were dude?

[xShadowAlk]

very stupid viewpoint fyi

Some people are just haters. I got like 2 negs just for making this thread like wtf.

[Amp]

BCH is a trash pump coin.

[Orgy]

Atleast it forced you to come out from your secret shell. Where you were dude?

busy