CoinHoarder I will reply later to your most recent post.
First, Im going to start
another thread about the
whether a crypto winter is now impossible or not. Interested to discuss analogous to the DOW stopped having deep, drawn out crashes after 1929 Great Depression and only goes to new plateaus with minor, short-leveled corrections. Will BTC stop having crypto winters? I will start a new thread to discuss this.
I would hold no less BCH than I hold BTC if trading for maximum short-term gains (and at current price ratios I would want much more BCH than BTC for short-term trading). But if wanting a HODL forever strategy (such as because of tax implications discussed in the prior post), then I am not sure how much BCH I would hold, probably much less. But I absolutely would not hold BTC long-term that was obtained after July. SegWit theft risk is not small enough.
EDIT: I found the Trilema logs
where they were discussing my thoughts and where he mentioned that
you can bury a segwit tx into legitimate spending which is deep enough to not be practically reorg-able. Now I perhaps realize what he means is that if your lineage has descendant UTXO which fork out to UTXO which the miners own (which is worth more than), then theyre unlikely to revert (and double-spend) that lineage. Or simply because the miners do not want to wreck too much havoc because this would make their rollback too unpopular. So he also means that if you can mix your activity in with the spending activity of whales, the miners are unlikely to revert the transactions of whales as that creates resistance to their fork.
The CME/CBOE futures markets just launched could enable the miners to make a hell of a lot of money when/if they attack BTCSegWit. They could earn profits on (and finance their massive chain reorganization with) massive shorting, on stealing (partaking the
SegWit pay to anyone donations of) BTC, and on the rise in their BCH bags which they trade back for cheap BTC being dumped like scalding potatoes.
They could consolidate much the BTC taking it from inexperienced/naive fools into the hands of the experienced wise elders (which thus increases the value and reliability of the reserve currency), and ride off into the sunset as kings, because crypto will not die and not go away because of such an attack would be justifiable to restore immutability to Bitcoin so we do not have
this insecure SegWit shit on the reserve currency. SegWit can run on Litecoin instead. We do not need it on Bitcoin because
Bitcoin is a global reserve currency not a medium-of-exchange for the masses as explained below:
Yes altcoins can already do transactions much cheaper than Bitcoin and that doesnt matter. Bitcoins transaction volume demand will always continue to increase because BTC is the reserve currency of crypto and so everyone wants to bank their profits in their unit-of-account which is BTC.
Bitcoins transaction market share will drop precipitously, but its share of the economic pie of crypto will remain very significant and grow because of the reason I stated. BTC miners/whales do not care about transaction volume, they care about value of the transactions and thus the amount of fees that those whose transacts fit within 1MB block size can afford to pay. For example, when every BTC transaction is $10 million, then a $5000 fee per transaction will not be a problem.
[
]
Presumably only transactions with had SegWit in their lineage would be at risk of being stolen with a massive chain reorganization.
And obviously its cheaper to only reorganize back in time to the point where enough BTC could be stoken to pay for the cost of the proof-of-work mining cost.
Also there is my crazy theory that BCH whales (who also include BTC miners) may have been trading BTC for BCH on exchanges, and they could also steal back those BTC while keeping the BCH, thus wrecking havoc on exchanges and on anyone who withdrew BTC from those exchanges.
I do not think there is any safe BTC unless youre obtaining it from an address from before August. And if you trust that payer to not be colluding with the miners/whales who will steal BTC with the hypothetical chain reorganization.
A controlled demo really says nothing about the game theory of
Mt. Box centralization of the hubs of LN. And the fact that most users will simply choose to have an account with a hub and thus be given fractional reserves. And the failures of hubs like we have failures of exchanges now. And the runs on the bank. And the surge spikes of settlement load on the main chain. Etc..
Were a long way from knowing which electronic currency people are going to want to use to buy coffee. Even if LN worked perfectly it would not necessarily win the adoption race for uptake.