Quote from: SweatyTroll on November 16, 2017, 08:37:53 AM

Is this losing almost half of it's market cap (more than 14 bil) in 3-4 days just a minor speed bump?

Probably. After such a spectacular spike, a retracement is only to be expected. We'll likely experience several waves of FOMO overbuying followed by others taking profits on 'free coinz'.

Quote from: SweatyTroll on November 16, 2017, 08:37:53 AM

When is the flippening happening?

If the flippening happens, it will be after many cycles of the above.

Quote from: bones261 on November 16, 2017, 08:57:02 AM

Why on Earth would I want to eat in a warehouse with a capacity of 8000 people?

Because you actually get to eat, rather than go to bed hungry.

Quote

Sound more like Casa Bonita then the Brown Palace.

But we have cliff divers! And roaming mariachis!
Grr. That's what I get for stretching an already-flawed analogy.
Apologies to our befuddled non-CO USA participants.

Quote from: ZhuldyzKaladinova on November 16, 2017, 09:00:41 AM

Do you still not understand the majority of people have already realized the low motives of the gang behind Bit/Altcoin Cash?

You are quite persistent at repeatedly spewing empty allegations. Yet for all your continued bluster, you have yet to offer any actual evidence.

Quote from: ZhuldyzKaladinova on November 16, 2017, 10:45:11 AM

To me, it's a waste of time.

And endless hours of trolling the thread of a coin in which you have no interest is a productive use of your time? Got it.

Quote from: seek4dream on November 16, 2017, 01:08:14 PM

I heard that there was a fork of BCH happening days ago.
I haven't claimed my BCH yet. Is it possible for to claim both BCH and the fork?

Well, the intent was that it not be a fork, but merely an upgrade to improve the DAA. There were a few renegade users that did not want to upgrade. While it took a while after the upgrade activated, a renegade block was finally mined. And Bitcoin Clashic was born (I don't know if it has an official name, but I've seen several refer to it as such). Will it survive? Who knows? Is it worth claiming? Your mileage may vary. Not available in all jurisdictions. Objects in rear view mirror may be smaller than they appear.

Quote from: Lauda on November 16, 2017, 02:12:55 PM

Quote from: standards on November 16, 2017, 02:10:57 PM

Quote from: garytheasshole on November 16, 2017, 01:59:25 PM

That's the problem, there is no dev team, only charlatans. Not a single cypherpunk on board with BCH.

I think it is not fair to say that. There are some teams behind it.

That is pure bullshit. There are 2-3 developers that have never produced any worthwhile code for Bitcoin. In other words: There is no development team, there are a few children playing in the sand box.

Denigrating assertion does not stand up to the scrutiny of logic.

A team recently started probing at the limits of what the Bitcoin network can actually achieve. In terms of controlled experiments directly scaling transaction count, on a worldwide subset of machines, and recording the results. About time someone did this, eh?

AAR, they found that with today's satoshi client, and commodity consumer hardware, the system starts bogging down at about 100 tx/s. In terms of blocksize, that would be ~33MB blocks. So we obviously have considerable headroom in the system for improvement by means of simple increase of maxblocksize. This would consume about 25% of a single core of a typical 4-core CPU, with 16 GB RAM, and an SSD, while consuming about 3 Mb/s of network BW.

But they did not stop there. Due to the fact that allocating more CPU cores to the problem did not improve performance above this (i.e., that it consumed a smaller percentage of additional cores, with no increase in throughput), they postulated that suboptimal multithreading performance might be the root of the issue. So they refactored the code to employ contemporary concurrency design techniques. After such refactoring, the performance of the system - on the same HW - was able to process 500 tx/s. This would correspond to >150 MB blocksize. I repeat - on the same, consumer-grade, hardware. Of course, this results in an increased network BW consumption of 15 Mb/s.

So we see that, despite the maturity of the satoshi client (i.e., a decade of development by Bitcoin's supposed best), there is significant low-hanging fruit in the deficiency of the software design of the satoshi client. Deficiencies having to do directly with scalability. Deficiencies that -- so far -- have not been addressed by the core developers.

Whether core has nobody that understands concurrency, or whether they just deem scalability to be a low priority, is a matter of conjecture. But the truth is that the core developers have not:
- measured and published such transaction capacity tests
- determined where the lowest bottleneck in system transaction capacity lies
- coded up a fix to remove the lowest bottleneck to system transaction capacity
- measured and published results with the fix for this lowest bottleneck to system transaction capacity

- All this in a time when system transaction capacity is the hottest issue - and has been for about two years.

On the other hand, another team has. Who was it? A collaboration of members of the teams working on Bitcoin Cash.

Quote from: cvdesty on November 16, 2017, 03:30:47 PM

Bitcoin will continue to dominate. That's not to say there won't be a place for Bitcoin Cash and others like it. In my opinion, consumers should see Bitcoin as a long term investment rather than a means to make every day purchases. If Bitcoin fees come down, that will change things, of course.

At this moment, fees for Bitcoin are 2636 times the fees for Bitcoin Cash.
(cashvscore.com)