Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 678 results by xDan
Really, I just want to create a thread that I can resurrect at a later date when the price is > $1000 again. Or higher... 
1st bump: $1K
2nd bump: $10K
3rd bump: ??
I'm not going to make any predictions other than one day I will be able to bump this thread and laugh at the permabear trolls and their "bitcon is dead!" nonsense.
See you all in a year or few. If any bears would be so kind as to post here saying Bitcoin will never reach that point again, it would be highly appreciated, and make this even more entertaining. Price currently is around $250.
1st bump: $1K
2nd bump: $10K
3rd bump: ??
I'm not going to make any predictions other than one day I will be able to bump this thread and laugh at the permabear trolls and their "bitcon is dead!" nonsense.
See you all in a year or few. If any bears would be so kind as to post here saying Bitcoin will never reach that point again, it would be highly appreciated, and make this even more entertaining. Price currently is around $250.
1st bump
See y'all at $10K
So, uh, 2nd bump. See you all at... $100K, maybe?
(maybe I'll bump at $50k too)
I guess with all the euphoria now it's hard to understand the reasons of my original post when the price was around $250. But at that time it was a bear market, the forums were full of people saying Bitcoin was dead and will never recover, etc etc. I guess they were wrong, huh
So, the thing we've been trying to avoid for years has actually happened: a contentious hard fork.
What are the ramifications?
Bitcoin Cancer Cell is the single crypto sharing SHA-256 with Bitcoin. Thus, miners are free to transition between the two as is more profitable. If Bitcoin Cancer increases in price, the market will subtract hashrate from Bitcoin and add it to the Cancer.
The Cancer is not only a direct threat to Bitcoin, but ultimately to itself since it is built on faulty fundamentals: The big block vision is one where blocks become so huge that only a few datacenters will be able to operate nodes, leading to a centralization level akin to PayPal and credit cards.
The Cancer comes from within us. It uses the same forums, chats and subreddits.
It is here to destroy.
The only solution? Excision before it metastazises and it's too late: Miners of the majority fork must band together and kill off the minority fork.
What are the ramifications?
Bitcoin Cancer Cell is the single crypto sharing SHA-256 with Bitcoin. Thus, miners are free to transition between the two as is more profitable. If Bitcoin Cancer increases in price, the market will subtract hashrate from Bitcoin and add it to the Cancer.
The Cancer is not only a direct threat to Bitcoin, but ultimately to itself since it is built on faulty fundamentals: The big block vision is one where blocks become so huge that only a few datacenters will be able to operate nodes, leading to a centralization level akin to PayPal and credit cards.
The Cancer comes from within us. It uses the same forums, chats and subreddits.
It is here to destroy.
The only solution? Excision before it metastazises and it's too late: Miners of the majority fork must band together and kill off the minority fork.
BS. It wasn't a contentious fork at all. It was the exact opposite; a peaceful break away. And it could happen at any time in the future again if even only one person decides to support it, we could have 100s or 1000s of these. Shit, every altcoin could have been implemented as a spin-off.
Despite being a BCC supporter and big blocker, I think original Bitcoin will easily win simply due to the existing network effect.
Stop being a pathetic whiner and let the market sort it out.
It's not proven until Lightning Network is proven (in the real world). When major wallets support it and it's shown to function for day to day payments, I expect a spike. (And genuine growth, too.)
Hey, so I just withdrew some EUR to my GBP (Barclays) bank account, and it seems I received approximately 3% less than what I should have according to both google and my bank's own listed EUR/GBP exchange rate.
What gives? Are there hidden foreign exchange costs I didn't know about?
What better ways are there to convert BTC to GBP? (That isn't localbitcoins, since I don't want to risk selling to a drug dealer or something)
What gives? Are there hidden foreign exchange costs I didn't know about?
What better ways are there to convert BTC to GBP? (That isn't localbitcoins, since I don't want to risk selling to a drug dealer or something)
Re: Why Does Anyone Think BTC Splitting into Two Will Make BU Go to the Moon?
I don't get it. It will actually be bad for BOTH chains if indeed Bitcoin forks into two. Some people who are following the space could see this as a weakness and another reason not to start investing or accepting BTC as payments. Imagine if you were a merchant and you have to go thru and be involved in this sh*t, with all the debates and the drama. And worst of all the uncertainty of BTC's future.
It has always been and always will be possible for a split. It's good to test this. Once tested, we'll lose the uncertainty if it ever happens in the future.
After the fork, any business transacting will get to choose between using $1/tx core coin or $0.01/tx unlimited coin. Hmmm, tough decision.
The real risk that Core seems not to care about is of people moving to an alt that allows cheap transactions already.
A functioning well tested Lightning Network built on 1 MB Core coin and implemented across all wallets I believe would also take Bitcoin to the moon, but it DOES NOT EXIST, and won't for some time.
I still can't understand is why people are supporting it If their software is full of bugs and almost everyone is against them.
Just a wiiiiild guess, but maybe people want a larger block size, and have lost trust in Core's willingness to ever deliver one.
If you think "everyone" is against it then you need to leave the echo chamber occasionally.
As long as your coins are in your own wallet (not an exchange) and you don't touch them nothing bad can happen.
Ultimately, if both chains continue to exist (a big if), you will have the same amount of both new types of coin. When it comes to spending either of those coins you'll have to think about it, see which chain your wallet software works with.
If anyone tells you one coin will be worth more than other, they are guessing. We don't know for sure what will happen. The risk-averse thing to do is to hold fast and see what happens.
Maybe gamblers will sell one of their coins to gain more of the other, but they can easily get burned if things don't turn out how they expect.
Ultimately, if both chains continue to exist (a big if), you will have the same amount of both new types of coin. When it comes to spending either of those coins you'll have to think about it, see which chain your wallet software works with.
If anyone tells you one coin will be worth more than other, they are guessing. We don't know for sure what will happen. The risk-averse thing to do is to hold fast and see what happens.
Maybe gamblers will sell one of their coins to gain more of the other, but they can easily get burned if things don't turn out how they expect.
Re: BTU will take over and become BTC -- but you are safe, and will have 2 coins!
BU is being kept up by just a few people with very deep pockets. Yes, I am referring to both Roger Ver & Jihan Wu. Other than a few shills that they pay there is no one really supporting BU.
I think you should avoid Googling and do a bit more fact checking. The community stands strong with it's support for SegWit. Pools signalling BU support doesn't mean anything. You know what bit of software they use to signal support, right?
I think you should avoid Googling and do a bit more fact checking. The community stands strong with it's support for SegWit. Pools signalling BU support doesn't mean anything. You know what bit of software they use to signal support, right?
Bitcoin's market share is lower than ever but the delusion of small blockers remains strong.
Miners are choosing the solution that is actually available *today* to solve the current serious problem of Bitcoin no longer being usable to make payments.
BU may not be a perfect solution but it's the only solution on the table.
(No, segwit is a can-kick that will gain not more than a few months)
We need an increase ASAP, that much is fact. BU, some 2 MB not-segwit compromise from Core. At the moment Bitcoin is bleeding more than it ever has done. Its first mover advantage and network effect depends on its ability to grow, and right now it can't.
People with egos and ivory tower ideals are sabotaging Bitcoin and destroying its practical use.
Maybe Lightning Networks will work and be beautiful but right now Bitcoin is dying and alts are flourishing.
Miners, developers, DO SOMETHING, ANYTHING!
People with egos and ivory tower ideals are sabotaging Bitcoin and destroying its practical use.
Maybe Lightning Networks will work and be beautiful but right now Bitcoin is dying and alts are flourishing.
Miners, developers, DO SOMETHING, ANYTHING!
I believe deploying a HF after the Segwit update will be much smoother than doing it in this current condition.
Unfortunately SegWit is dead end of development, viewed by miners as a backdoor tool and enemy to decentralization.I agree that everything would be so much easier with SegWit and Lightning Network.
But greedy miners won't allow it knowing that both these upgrades will kill their profits.
Bitcoin's entire security model is predicated on miners being "greedy". If miners being greedy is somehow bad then Bitcoin is fundamentally broken.
Re: Vinny Lingham - Bitcoin Unlimited (BTU) will be an Alt Coin, BTC will crash
Price will be ruined due to Core dragging their feet over a block size increase and generally fucking around prioritising technical perfection over actual usefulness and being totally unwilling to compromise. This is why alts are rapidly gaining on BTC.
If a fork causes Bitcoin to crash hard, then frankly, it deserves to, since this can happen at any point in the future.
Two coins would be the best solution at this time. All current hodlers have coins on both chains. One chain can scale on chain, be actually used as a payment system, the other chain can play at being digital gold and pray that lightning network is somehow better than on chain payments.
At least with a fork current hodlers will own both the gold and the payment network. No fork means an altcoin will eat Bitcoin's payment network market share.
A fork should make everybody happy. Except Vinny, who needs to cry some more.
If a fork causes Bitcoin to crash hard, then frankly, it deserves to, since this can happen at any point in the future.
Two coins would be the best solution at this time. All current hodlers have coins on both chains. One chain can scale on chain, be actually used as a payment system, the other chain can play at being digital gold and pray that lightning network is somehow better than on chain payments.
At least with a fork current hodlers will own both the gold and the payment network. No fork means an altcoin will eat Bitcoin's payment network market share.
A fork should make everybody happy. Except Vinny, who needs to cry some more.
Re: If Price drops after ETF not approved, it's because people are Dumb
It will probably dip temporarily but be quick back up
So make sure to stock up on coins if it gets declined.
So make sure to stock up on coins if it gets declined.
this
tbh, even if it is accepted I expect a dip or at least continued high volatility (a spike followed by a crash back to where we are or lower). The great positive affect of an ETF on the price would take a while to materialise.
When BU gets near 50% things are gonna get reaaally interesting. What crazy things will Core do? Will they accept defeat? Will they create their own minority hashrate altcoin?
Whatever happens, the Bitcoin hodler wins. This stagnation has been a cancer.
Whatever happens, the Bitcoin hodler wins. This stagnation has been a cancer.