But wouldn't larger blocks make it more difficult to run a node?  The chain would grow too fast.

Decentralization is always the highest priority for core.  Increasing the block size directly threatens that this since it highly favors the larger miners.  Therefore should only be used as a last resort which we are not even close to. 

Core doesn't care one bit about returns, futures, ETFs, or even mass adoption.  They cannot be bought or influenced and will protect the integrity of the code at all costs.  That philosophy is the very reason why Bitcoin is even here.  I for one am thankful for their patience and diligence.

Bitcoin Cash just got listed on Coinbase.  So flood of noobs are excited.

Frustrating how Coinbase will list BCH but not implement Segwit.

Most price calculations we've seen are done by measuring percentage of gold, real estate market, etc... and dividing by the total 21 million. 

But we all know there are only 17 million out there in the short term, at least 20% are lost, several million in cold storage, and the rest are being HODL'd.  Leaving only maybe 3-4 million BTC available for buying/selling for whatever reason??

I think the network effect has officially taken root so it's now growing at an increasing exponential rate. 

More new buyers = More HODL = Exponentially fewer coins available

Keeping your keys offline is obviously necessary for making sure you get your new coin. 

But what good is having it if you can't buy/sell after the fork?

The shutting down of exchanges indicates that governments and/or banks are considering it a threat which is exactly what it's supposed to do.  (Or at least disruptive enough to create laws and regulations around it.)   You'll know that bitcoin is actually succeeding and growing when governments and banks start to put up a fight which is what we may be starting to see.  And attacking the exchanges are exactly how they'll do it.

No, the government certainly can't control the value or exchange rate.   But they can close down the shady shop on the corner where you cash in your paper lottery ticket.
Until grocery stores universally start to accept bitcoins, having 845 of them doesn't do you any good if you can't get anyone to accept it as currency.   Otherwise, it's just a meaningless number like the bankers and investors are suggesting.

For the near future, the exchanges are vital for fiat conversion and therefore adoption.   Regardless of the outcome, that battle is inevitable and an important sign the war is progressing as planned.

I suppose there are a few different ways to look at this...

Bitcoin was created by design to cause a disruption to normal fiat, currency, and asset classes.  War and uncertainty is inevitable and in fact required in the process.  The Chinese government has the power to easily turn things on and off.  Especially something they can't regulate, tax, or control.  Why would they not do this???     

The shutdown of any exchanges means that bitcoin is disruptive and actually succeeding in what it was intended to do!   Get ready for more of this all over the world in the coming months and years.

The verdict is still out if bitcoin will be allowed to survive in public and truly be worth anything.  That could take decades and which is why any crypto is still very risky.   But I see the adoption by Japan as the biggest victory yet.   Each country will need to decide how to handle, but the long term decision of whether it lives or dies will most likely end up in the hands of the United States.  (As usual...)  Where the citizens ultimately decide on what is legal or not.   Most likely it will end up being taxed and regulated, but that court case will be the deciding day if a bitcoin is worth $100 or $100,000. 

Governments can't stop the blockchains but they CAN shut down the exchanges.  What good is having 134 bitcoins if you can't transfer back to fiat?  Value would then plummet in a sense killing it. 

I suspect that is why sites like Coinbase are so strict on their usage policies.  Trying to keep the market clean so not to give the feds any reason to shut them down.

Sorry newbie, but growing fears about another fork in November.  I guess similar question to the Bitcoin Cash ordeal which I missed.

Would your private key exist on both chains?
How do you know if you have a wallet that will support both coins in case you wanted to cash out?   (For example something like Coinbase.)
How would you access and trade the resulting 'alt' coins?

I'm a bit late to the bitcoin party but am investing now because I understand and believe in the potential.   Need some help from the group though...

Transaction speed, scalability, confusing forks to new coins, transaction fees, etc...  These things all seem to be the key barriers to widespread adoption and success of the bitcoin itself.   I know development is constantly working on these issues but there seems to be quite a bit of disagreement between the core devs and the miners on the best way to proceed.   Segwit2x was a sure thing, but now maybe not?  Increase block size yes or no?   Ideas like Lightning Network may or may not help?   I think everyone agrees that scalability and speed MUST happen but there are some hard liners that are faithful to the original core blockchain design.

I totally believe that the democracy and decentralization is vital.  But I'm worried it may be the very undoing of the success of the chain.  How can bitcoin be a competitive currency option if it takes 8 hours and $800 to process a transaction?   Or will it just be a mechanism for storing significant wealth?

Any devs or miners that can make me feel better???