Hope you guys are ready for another stall. BCH difficulty is

>>3167174
>and the chain is unable to mine anything.
What is EDA?

File: file.png (163KB, 640x364px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 640x364px

>>3167199
Congratulations, you are retarded and can't read.

If the chain drops back to 7% hashpower like it had at the last adjustment, it would be mining at ~1.5 blocks per hour and would take 2 months to adjust again normally, once again making BCH useless for the time being except for future speculation.

8MB Blocksize BCH actually consistently mining <20KB blocks. LOL. Good joke guys!

>>3167227
EDA? Yes or No?

I'll be sitting in BCC for the next 7 hours then for hopefully an epic pump

>>3167174
the chinks will keep mining it. your theory that once the diff increases everyone will go running back to segwit is going to be BIGLY wrong.

Your coin is dying man. You better get out now while you still can.

>>3167272

Literally no one questions why miners all decided to suddenly start signaling for Segwit on Aug 1st., we are supposed to believe a bunch of camo hats and hashtags won all the miners over? It's the crypto equivalent of #bringbackourgirls the UASF movement meant jack shit.

>>3167272
Good joke.

BCH had 7% of the hashpower until the difficulty adjusted to 7%, only then did miners jump on because it was massively overvalued compared to its difficulty. If you think that means anything other than that 40% of miners only care about money and don't give a damn about the coins themselves, you might be delusional.

>>3167174
Thanks just got 100k

>>3167305
But now they have coins, welll they get them after 100 blocks so some of them might mine a bit more to get the coins and make sure they are worth something... if they all leave its eda

Also, difficulty retargeting has a cap of +300%. Without the cap, we'd be seeing an increase of ~+650% (~45 blocks per hour divided by 6 minus).

>>3167305
it's not just that. all the exchanges are listing it. btc.com is in the process of making an ios wallet.

the writing is on the wall.

>>3167325
*by 6 * 100 - 100% to get the "true" adjustment without the cap

>>3167323
They won't all leave. We had 7% of the BTC hashpower mining at a LOSS. THOSE are the "REAL" BCH supporters who are willing to take a loss to try and secure the BCH chain. If only they stay, they will end up with ~1.5 blocks an hour. BCH would need to maintain more than HALF of the people mining NOW to keep the chain mining 6+ blocks an hour.

>>3167329
Their only incentive is MONEY. They don't care about the tech.

>>3167305
If that was true they would have switched almost immediately or at least preparing to do so.

>>3167408
Yes. I'm predicting that once profitability tanks post difficulty retarget today, either the price should at least hit parity by the end of the night, or the miners will leave.

>>3167384
>They won't all leave. We had 7% of the BTC hashpower mining at a LOSS. THOSE are the "REAL" BCH supporters who are willing to take a loss to try and secure the BCH chain. If only they stay, they will end up with ~1.5 blocks an hour. BCH would need to maintain more than HALF of the people mining NOW to keep the chain mining 6+ blocks an hour.
Litterally this. BCC's chain is secured no matter what.

>>3167174
Hey man -

Did you buy back into Ark?

>>3167384
>THOSE are the "REAL" BCH supporters who are willing to take a loss to try and secure the BCH chain. If only they stay, they will end up with ~1.5 blocks an hour.

Logic error. If only they stay they are going to coordinate to launch EDA.

>>3167420
I meant when BCC first became over 50% more profitable. Nobody really switched untill 100% profit (I'm betting so they had room to secure for a short term loss near future)

>>3167426
Suggesting that BCH supporters would purposely exploit retargeting methods doesn't bode well for its future, even if the intent is good.

>>3167423
No, but I"m working on getting a bounty that will put me back on the ark shuttle.

>>3167426
>>3167436
Regardless, it just proves that BCH only has 7% "real" support and BTC has up to 55% "real" support (because they haven't moved despite BCH being more profitable in the last few days).

It's clear BTC has more miner support regardless of price (or are at least forced to support it due to NYA).

>>3167436
You know that if miners were mining for profit 100% would jump, freezing the other chain?

They wouldn't 'exploit' EDA, that's what it's meant for. Few miners temporarily mining at loss for a long-term benefit.

>>3167449
>Regardless, it just proves that BCH only has 7% "real" support and BTC has up to 55% "real" support

No data to confirm that yet. Pools weren't ready to switch before and many still aren't. That's different from 'won't switch'.

>>3167468
Or they help the coin that is not constanly pissing in their faces and shitting on them.... maybe its more than money and msybe the apreciate it if people are nice to them.

Would you want to work for someone that is constantly talking you down? Only if there is no alternative right?

>>3167485

The thing is we still don't know WHY pools switched, we are led to believe it is for profit but it is quite possible many were waiting in secret to do it and kill Segwit coin.

Again I still find it fishy they all decided to start signaling Segwit weeks ago when they've been resistant to it for years. It IS possible they did it out of the NYA but since that is now looking dead in the water, they have no reason to uphold their end of the bargain anymore so they may mine BCC out of spite.

>>3167468
I literally just stated it isn't all miners, but we know for a fact it is AT LEAST 33 - 40%.

You new fags are too dumb to realize that bch is all smoke and mirrors.
Bch will become even more obsolete once btc forks again in November further dividing up your community of simple minded idiots.
BTC reigns supreme!!!!!
P.S. if you have fomo fever after missing out on btc then research and invest in ripple while its under 0.20¢
fyi XRP is technically not a cryptocurrency but its already being adopted by big banks as a regulated version of blockchain for instant transactions across borders and cross currency and will be the future of banking as we know it.

>>3167305
42%

>>3167557
>fyi XRP is technically not a cryptocurrency but its already being adopted by big banks as a regulated version of blockchain for instant transactions across borders and cross currency and will be the future of banking as we know it.

stopped reading at ripple

>>3167571
?

>>3167174
And thus another "bitcoin overtake" comes to an end.

First it was DASH, then XRP, then ETH, now BCH. What coin is gonna do a ""flippening"" next biz? In need to know.

>>3167595
42.37%

>>3167582
At least i research, if you did thorough research on Btrash you would realize what a scam coin it is lmfao
Newfags crack me up with their get rich quick hopes and dreams. Ico's are a fast growing bubble

>>3167606
Lol talking to a mirror again?

>>3167598
Xrp is just getting started and shouldnt be compared to other crypto coins. Its been around for 5 years unlike all the scam coins that are popping up over night and flooding the market with shit

>>3167621
Ripple is one of the biggest shitcoins going

>>3167606
>>3167598

zzz fudders out in force today

Bitcoin Cash will eventually takeover your kikecoin because BCC will remain fast and low cost and not centralised by a single company (hello kikestream/kikebase/gemini(kikes)).

If you haven't noticed the problem yet, it's kike manipulation, not Bitcoin.

Kikecoin splitting in november doesn't affect BCC because BCC will never have segwit, also an extra megabyte in 3 months is absolutely worthless.

>>3167611
I'll be the one laughing omw to the bank while ypu poor fags commit suicide when the ico scam implodes on itself. God knows you wont know when to pull out just like your dad when he impregnated your whore mom lmao

>>3167634
Real big time investors buy into btc not bch so good luck with that. Not to mention if bch ever caught up to bch in value both coins would become worthless because it would defeat the purpose of having a cap
How stupid are you?

>>3167325
True. Most miners only care about profit, but the fact that BCC is the only chain that has EDA means it's going to be the most profitable to mine in the long run, as it will be the only coin named "bitcoin" that will be able to adjust for the ebbs and flows of hashpower. BTC can't (not without a hard fork anyway), and there are no plans for S2X to.

EDA is the thing that will save BCC, and is the ONLY thing that makes it competitive with BTC.

Bch reaching an equal value to btc will cause both coins to fail as the market will lose faith over the fact that anybody could fork it and in so many words inflate the market with spinoffs of btc

>>3167667

You can tell who has ever run a business and who isn't. "Most profitable coin of the day" doesn't mean most profitable for you a year from now. Miners feel their long-term business is at threat from Core's antics, if it means them literally going out of business or mining a year from now, they will mine at a loss everyday if they have to (which isn't even really a loss per-say but an opportunity cost)

>>3167666
>Not to mention if bch ever caught up to bch in value both coins would become worthless because it would defeat the purpose of having a cap
>Le "noe free muneys" argument
Only one coin needs to drop to 0.
Hardforks have happened before.
Why are so many BTC supporters crypto retards?

>>3167604
Only 7% of that are true BCH supporters

>>3167702
>because I said so

File: with-jews-you-lose.png (19KB, 435x390px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 435x390px

>>3167687
"the market will lose faith"
kys this is not a commie utopia
"the market" cant lose faith you mongoloid

this will just show that the true free currency without jews controlling it will always win

FUCK YOU JEWCOCKSUCKER

>>3167174
And btc will still be slow as shit! This is why eth and ltc are uptrending.

>>3167701
Fork #3 will cause bch and sx2 to fail while btc will surge with renewed investor faith. Just wait and see for yourself.
You should of sold your bch at the peak of south koreas pump and dump on Sat

>>3167666

As I pointed out goy, the only companies supporting kikestream are...you guessed it, companies run by other kikes.

That doesn't mean shit globally because kikes don't have influence in markets other than the USA.

>>3167634
>Everything I don't like is Jewish

Is this how you rationalize all your delusions?

>>3167701
>Hardforks have happened before.

I'm trying to find the hardfork history of bitcoin, but it's a bit confusing. Do you know a good page to read up on it?

>>3167736
Coin desk did some good articles on the fork

>>3167707
>He can't read

>>3167733
>companies run by other kikes.

So 99% of the companies in existence? if you want to make money, follow the jews.

>>3167733
If Antisemitism is your only big argument i dont even need to bother pointing out how stupid you are

>>3167736
BCH was the only contentious hard fork. Every other fork was a bug fix.

2X will be the second contentious hard fork.

>>3167765
It went to $250 after that

BCC shills:
>constant insults
>antisemetism every other post
>unironically calls people BTC supporters
>delusions of persecution
>accuses others of FUD while preaching the fall of BTC
>probably many other things I missed cause its early
This is why I despise you.

>>3167794
Don't act like BTC shills are any better.

>>3167808
They are, at least here. On Reddit they're just as bad, maybe worse. BCH wins for biggest delusions of grandeur though.

>>3167794
>antisemetism
Literally kill yourself cutfag

>>3167736
>>3167764
I wasn't specifically referring to Bitcoin hardforks, but yes they've happened too.
BCC/BCH is better than SegWit2X because the miners wan't bigger blocks and Segwit is literally designed to justify taking money away from them.

You could fix tx maleability without SegWit and if that was done as a soft/hard fork nobody would have any issues.
BTC/BCC is literally down to if you trust Blockstream/Core vs Jihan/China. This is why you see the "Jews vs Chinese" flamewars.
Tbh I see BCC as a vote against the shitty parts of Core because there is literally nothing stopping people from hardforking BCC after it takes over.
I think hardforks are inherently more decentralized/voluntary than "softforks" based on lies.

>>3167621
XRP is neither decentralized nor trustless and has a ridiculously high supply. But every couple of months it gets pumped for a week or 2 on some click-baity 'news' and eventually corrects heavily, like your average shitcoin.

Last time it pumped hard it's market cap increased past ETH to the 2nd rank, everyone swore it was gonna overtake bitcoin... then it corrected, heavily. ETH did the same. So did DASH before those two if I remember correctly. Now BCH seems to be following the same pattern.

The point is there's always an army of shills & bagholders swearing that [insert pumping coin] is "obviously" going to overtake bitcoin in tx volume/marketcap/hashrate/whatever.

File: christian_bale-american_psycho.jpg (19KB, 375x298px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 375x298px

>>3167634
>BCC will remain fast and low cost and not centralised by a single company

Lmao, holy shit. These fucking shills man, unbelievable.

>>3167835
S W 2 X + L N

>>3167689
"Most profitable for today" is about all the crypto game has going for it. Game theory dictates that with all else equal, utility dictates decision making, and for at least 30% of miners, short-term profitability is the decision with the highest utility for them.

Most mining pools will automatically mine the most profitable chain available for the miners they manage, and that could be anything from BTC to ZCash for the average Antminer ASIC.

In the long run, the best choice for miners long-term is the choice that allows them to accumulate profits the fastest, because mining is a literal arms race; newer ASICs come out every 3 months that are faster and more efficient, so breaking even on costs is about the best you can hope for unless your electricity costs are near zero. In that type of competitive environment, most miners can't afford to be concerned with the long view, because there's no guarantee they're going to exist in the long term.

>>3167877
>Zcash
>ASIC

Sha256 ASICs will never mine anything other than BTC or BCH.

Wonder how long Jihan can mine at a loss when difficulty spikes back up. Either he has deep pockets or he's backed by the Communist party...

>>3167760

oh look I found the kike. Only a kike would use that made up word, if I called a nigger a nigger it would be called 'racism'.

My argument is against centralisation, something that only kikes strive to do. They do ti with everything, who do you think controls the Federal Reserve? Or the US government?

The inevitable result will be Bitcoin Cash succeeding, or an altcoin usurping the #1 crypto position because cryptocurrency is innately decentralised. If there's something in a coin that just doesn't work, you can just move on to another coin that does it better.

Grasping kikes can't wrap their destructive control around crypto; even though they're trying very hard to do just that with Bitcoin these last 4 years.

>>3167727
>Fork #3 will cause bch and sx2 to fail
...so many things wrong with this statement.

1) How would a fork of a chain that BCH isn't on cause BCH to fail?
2) S2X had 40% support while SegWit alone only had 33% support in the last signaling survey performed; why wouldn't splitting the miners in such a manner be suicide for both chains?
3) BTC + SegWit will not include a fork to compensate for loss of hashpower, so the BTC chain would likely be losing more hashpower for no reason.
4) There is no likely or even reasonably forseeable circumstance in which those who were already mining BCH at a loss would ever switch to either BTC or S2X, so there is no reason BCH would even be impacted by this second fork.

You're seriously lacking in knowledge. It's time to stop posting.

>>3167932
You're the one who should stop posting. You somehow think that BCH was the magic answer and that every BCH miner is as deluded as you are. Most miners are waiting for an actual solution, even if they moved to BCH temporarily. 2x will cause another shift in mining power from BOTH chains.

>>3167791

More fake FUD. You realize those posts in the picture are from 08/19, correct? The low since 8/19 is ~$550.

>>3167922
You all forget that most miners dont care for bcash and they only mine bch to buy themselves more btc, aka the driving factor.
Keep praying to the shitcoin gods while the btc kings use you poorfags as a footstool

getting real tired of BCH desu - too volatile too buy and keeps fucking my altcoins

>>3167922
This coming out of your nigger mouth lmfao

>>3167835
>>3167764
>>3167745
Aight, it's pretty clear to me now, thanks. The whole decentralization discussion seems a bit pointless to me, a certain amount of centralization is unavoidable if you want crypto to mature and succeed.

how easy is the process of switching from mining btc to bch and vice versa?

Forks = fud
You bch fags dont even know whos responsible for 90% of the mining efforts hahahaha

>>3167922
You still think that this shit is going to fly in the real world (outside of /pol/), even after recent events. I feel bad for you, that your brainwashing will probably permanently change the course of your life for the worse. I find it interesting that BCC shills seem to largely be mostly coming from the alt-right perspective. I guess maybe that's cause you guys believe that oriental people are smarter than whites? Is it an inferiority complex that's behind your issues with the world? Could be.

>>3167964

With the EDA it really doesn't matter, BCC cannot suffer chain death; eventually the price disparity between BCC and BTC will close and also the lower transaction costs of BCC will drive adoption.

You simply cannot have middlemen and expect to remain as cheap as a rival without them.

>>3167975
>>3167964

Oh look you forgot to change your proxy you dumbarse kike shill

>>3167970
Get used to it - it's here forever.

>>3167998
>(outside of /pol/)
This is /biz/ retard

>>3167985
Exactly, even btc will need some regulations if it wants to make it to the 6 figure big leagues.
Thats why i like XRP as well, its a centralized company thats bringing blockchain tech to banks and big name banks are already adopting it. Not to mention the ceo owns 60% of the coins and he recently had them locked into escrow accounts so that his company is unable to flood the market with them down the road which wouldve caused value to drop drastically

>>3168022
Why would i change my proxy? Im not trying to pretend im a diff anon

>>3168008
>With the EDA it doesn't really matter
Wrong. If you are just above the EDA cutoff (like I speculated a malicious miner was purposely doing the first few days of the fork), a single adjustment will take over five and a half months. Good luck keeping a chain alive when it mines one block per 2 hours for half a year.

>eventually the price disparity between BCC and BTC will close
You are correct, but remember that this requires the yoyoing to stop and for the chain to actually survive a scenario like the above.

>the lower transaction costs of BCC will drive adoption.
Not if SegWit/Lightning achieves the same thing and leaves BCH in the dust. Normies don't give a flying fuck about our little "blockchain debate". When they saw the fork, I was flooded with comments along the lines of "LOL did you get more free bitcoins?" or "WTF CRYPTO IS A SCAM THEY JUST CREATED MORE COINS OUT OF THIN AIR!". They only give a shit about whatever chain is the "real" one, and it is unanimously agreed that it is Bitcoin unless/until the Bitcoin Cash chain has more total Proof of Work.

>>3168022
I just call them how i see them and youre obviously a nigger that hates jews and the real king aka btc

File: rip.png (5KB, 559x67px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 559x67px

guys?

>>3168008
>BCC cannot suffer chain death
>BTC can

So BCC is like the HIV-virus of BTC? When you think BCC is beaten it's actually staying dormant, until the cycle repeats itself.

>>3168064

>Wrong. If you are just above the EDA cutoff

Can't keep it just above the EDA cutoff forever, it will simply cost too much. I also suspected an entity was purposely doing this after the fork.

>Not if SegWit/Lightning achieves the same thing and leaves BCH in the dust.

Speculation at best, without Blockstream blocking everything BCC can push updates out with little resistance.

>>3168125
>no devs
>updates

You know increasing block size increase is not actual development right? Anyone can do it.

>>3168125
If you have enough mining power and can throttle your miners to specifically hit above the threshold you can. This isn't realistic but I am just explaining the case where BCH is almost guaranteed to die a slow, painful death. You can be somewhere in the middle and it will still take 3 months for an adjustment, probably also enough to fuck the chain. Right now we are seeing the opposite which will end up just as bad because of the high inflation period right now from 42% of BTC miners mining at 7% difficulty.

If blockstream actually succeeds at forcing 2x to legally be unable to use segwit I will go all in on BCH out of pure spite. I can't stand stupid kikes like that even if the technology is (IMO) superior or just more adopted.

And yes, it is my opinion. I don't care who wins, I just know I want the "original" chain to win. If BCH becomes the main chain and rebrands to just "Bitcoin", I am fine with that. Whatever helps crypto as a whole. I'm not stupid enough to put all my bags in one basket. I can't stand stream kikes or bch shills.

I used to be a bitcoin maximalist despite one of my best friends constantly telling me about ETH when it was a buck. He has 9000 ETH and I now have 10. I've learned never to assume BTC will ALWAYS win or at least to diversify. But until BTC stops winning or comes dangerously close to flipping (like it did with ETH at one point), I'm holding majority BTC.

>>3168118
It's hit >110k before senpai.

so we can expect another PnD to get the price up so it stays profitable? nice.

>>3167794
basically the whole sthick is calling everyone who disagrees with them a jew, and coming up with the dumbest conspiracy theories about btc being a jewish plot.
Yet Jihan is the one opening mining farms in fucking Tel Aviv

>>3167758
>if you want to make money, follow the jews.

Bancor?

Kill yourself kike rat faggot, we will kill you, slaughter you.

>>3168245

>no devs
>updates

Makes sense. Luckily BCC has 4 independent development teams.

>>3168337
>BCC has 4 independent development teams.
>this is what BCC cucks actually believe

The moment BCC gets over 50% I'm fucking out fuck this bullshit with BTC and ((((blockstream)))).

I did more then enough research to figure out BCC is a lot better then BTC.

I want a decentralized feature not some company buying it all up. Really fuck BTC and the kikes behind it.

>>3168774
It will also be easy to shill to normies.

"It was just a better version of bitcoin with faster transactions and cheaper fees"

YEA BOIIIIIIIIII

>>3168793
>"What do you mean anon? Are you saying Bitcoin created more money out of thin air? That doesn't sound very stable."

>"Why is it called Bitcoin Cash? It sounds like a copy of Bitcoin."

Unless it becomes the main Bitcoin chain you will never convince normies to adopt it. 50% hashrate isn't enough. You have to have more work overall (block height != work). This would take several weeks of being ahead of the main fork, not just 50% hashpower.

>>3168793

Normies don't even know what bitcoin cash is lol

>>3167998
>recent events
the barcelona and finland massacres hurt nationalism?

What if miners are mining BCH now because there with almost 50% hashpower gone the BTC difficulty reduction that happens in 1 day means they can then switch to BTC again and make even more money?

>>3167174
I hope there's going to be another pump. I missed the last one because Electron Cash was built by idiots and crashed on macOS.
I need to get rid of this shitcoin.

File: file.png (50KB, 374x238px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 374x238px

Also reminder that I called the yoyo 3 weeks ago, although I had too much faith in the NYA preventing it from happening.

>>3167174
So we can have two bitcoins that will be nonfunctional for a while.

Once the hashrate moves back to btc, the mempool will still be bloated, meanwhile BCH will have a too high difficulty for its price to incentivize miners leading to longer block times.

Meanwhile Litecoin, which is essentially segwit 4X is not affected by this mess because it has another hashing algorithm.

Cool.

>>3169813
Yes. The scaling debate might literal kill crypto for reasons other than politics. It ends up having monumental effects on the blockchain stability.

What if this was Jihan's plan all along?

>>3169712

>>3169811
you didn't call it though, jessica. you said it wouldn't happen. baffling you would even post that. truly baffling.

>>3169877
Reread it again. I said it was unlikely, but if it did happen, it would yoyo.

File: Head And Shoulders.gif (244KB, 2108x926px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 2108x926px

why didn't you listen?

>>3169893
i'm not saying the sun is going to come out tomorrow, but if it does it's going to be bright. don't quote me though.

>>3169926
False equivalence.

>>3167794
T b h i was on btc side but whenever i see people crying about antisemItism and making emotional arguments about despising folks i know to pick the other side

>Hillary
>Bancor

Jews had a good run, but they're no good for business anymore.

>>3169877
>Is it autism?

>>3169936
you're out of order.

Should I sell or hold?
What exactly is happening today with BCC?

>>3169999
If you bought high, Hold until you see an exit.

Remember if you sell low, you might be selling at the lowest low and reverse.

If you bought low, trade it around.

>>3169999
Price is still up in the air. The only guarantee is blockchain instability. If BCH is pumped to .28 it is going to continue yoyoing again.

ASIC forks were a mistake.

>>3169827

Well it seems BTC enthousiasts can thank god that the BCH difficulty adjustment only happened two days ago and that there remain only 198 blocks to be mined, which at half the hashpower would take less than 3 days in which BTC would function at half it's normal capacity.

This is a worst case scenario because it's likely that mining power is going to switch back to btc in 20 minutes when it becomes more profitable once again.

BCH however will quadruple its difficulty which means that with its current hashrate it would still mine blocks every 6-7 minutes.
However if we go back to the hashrate of last week it would go to one block every 30-40 minutes or so. Confirmation times of 3-6 hours. Not the end of the world. It also seems that if the hashrate is too low BCH changes it's difficulty faster then every 2016 blocks. Can someone confirm?

In any case, it seems to me that BTC is the riskier one right now. But barring a massive rise in the BCH/BTC ratio, it will likely readjust its difficulty soon.

However if I am correct about the fact that BCH can readjust difficulty lower sooner then that means that only BTC is truly vulnerable to these kind of hash wars.

The pump in BCH in hindsight was probably done by miners to get a mania going so they could dump the easily mined BCH's on the highly valued market. With the difficulty going up the incentive for miners to pump BCH is less in my opinion (because they cant generate that many of them that fast anymore)

Just my thoughts.

>>3170063
The BCH adjustment is happening NOW. 1 BLOCK LEFT.

>>3170063
Massive inflation due to diff cap + too many blocks + being under BTC parity (has to be ~.28 to match with 28% difficulty to be profitable post-adjustment).

This is gonna be good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcweVMiR1aE

Adjustment is a go.

The prediction is as follows:

Since BCH only had 7% mining before it was profitable, we only saw droves of hashpower move in after it became more profitable than BTC after an adjustment. Adjustment spikes the diff to 28%, which means it needs to be at or above .28 BTC to be more profitable than BTC. If this doesn't happen, greedy miners will migrate BACK to BTC, causing massive BCH chain instability. Emergency adjustment won't kick in because even with 7% there's still enough to mine 1.5 blocks an hour, which is below the threshold for emergency adjusting. The instability will either cause a pump and another yoyo if the pump surpasses 0.28 BTC, or it will tank BCH. The price is up in the air, so watch the miner migration and see how the markets react to it. It's going to cause a feedback loop.

>>3170147
I sense fear in you

>>3170161
Fear of what? I hold both coins. The only thing I fear is BCH causing both coins to die.

>>3170161
BCH is significantly more likely to cause a scorched earth than to kill BTC.

>>3170063

BCC's emergency difficulty adjustment happens when fewer than 6 blocks are mined in 12 hours judged by MTP, each instance will lower difficulty by 20%

If enough miners switch over it is possible for EDA to trigger again, whether this happens is yet to be seen.

This battle is just getting started, and the markets are barely weighing in yet.

I can't wait for BCC to replace BTC. Kings don't rule forever.

File: file.png (280KB, 2688x2688px) Image search: [Google]

280KB, 2688x2688px

I just now realized BCH WANTS these yoyos.

BCH requires 5% hashpower or less (1/6th of difficulty) to get an emergency adjustment as of current difficulty. BCH had 7% when it was unprofitable. The BCH miners would have to coordinate the adjustment together, purposely stalling their own chain for twelve hours, multiple times (EDA also has a cap), until it dropped. During this time BCH becomes unusable.

Then it would be profitable again, and miners would come back. Repeat ad nauseum because there's nothing that would cause this to stop........ except BCH staying above profit level permanently. This is their endgame.

You exploit pools that only care about the most profitable pool, and you force those people to go back to BCH by exploiting the difficulty retarget system in BCH and stalling your chain until it becomes more profitable, something BTC can't due because of its high difficulty. BCH can repeat this practice until enough people migrate for it to stop working (roughly 10% of BTC difficulty).

However, if you continue to pump the coin while doing these "attacks" on your own BCH chain, miners are less likely to switch back after a while.

7% of BTC hashpower is being used to destroy all of BTC.

Ironically, the way to stop this from happening over and over.... is by mining BCH.

>>3170350
Why? Why BCC?

Why not any other coin?

>>3170442
So who do you think is gonna win then?

Blockstream busted in more lies:

https://github.com/nob2x/NOB2X/pull/25

Most of nob2x.org companies listed have no stance on Segwit2x and BS is lying to everyone as always, they're also refusing to change the list.

They will stop at nothing to bullshit their way to destroying BTC. Wake up neckbeards, BCH is trying to save your money and the retards keep telling you to sell

>>3170448
Because it's a hardfork of the original Bitcoin.
So are XT, Classic and Unlimited but BCC seems to have the most legitimacy.

>>3170521
XT, classic and unlimited weren't forks, they were just clients that would accept blocks over 1MB

>>3170448

Bitcoin Cash fixes the major gripes with Bitcoin (transaction fees + speed) without any new technology, which requires testing to ensure stability.

>>3170475
I don't know. BTC has better adoption but BCH miners can literally force BTC to allow it to live using emergency retargeting. All it takes is a tiny fraction of BTC's hashpower to fluctuate the BCH difficulty at will.

I think the plan is to keep this up until people start noticing BCH, because the attacks not only help BCH miners (via massive inflation during the difficulty drops), but also hurt BTC by causing the blocks to slow down drastically.

BCH is literally a parasite and it's going to kill itself and the host with the help of greedy BTC miners. It's now seeming more likely that long term something has to give. The things that stop this infinite loop of bullshit is:

a) BCH price drops so low and stays low that it's not recoverable. We can already see that there are enough people pumping and miners exploiting that this is unlikely (for now).

b) BCH price stays above BTC parity, eventually causing it to grow steadily and overtaking BTC, at which point it truly flips.

c) You mine BCH to (ironically) destroy it, because enough hash power stops the attack from being possible (you have to own a little over half the hashpower of malicous miners to stop this attack from being guaranteed to occur). This doesn't even destroy it, this just puts it on life support and guarantees it lives. It can only die this way if price tanks and BTC supporters continue to waste money mining this until it's unrecoverable.

d) BTC miners stop being greedy and don't switch to BCH when it. Good luck with this one.

From a pure game theory perspective, if this is legitimately being done on purpose, then holy shit. These guys are geniuses.

>>3170548
Bitcoin: Now for Luddites.

>>3169936
You are truly the niggriest of nigs, fucking autist

>>3170077
Anonymous Korean underwater bbq forum, yet he trips

>>3170147
>there's still enough to mine 1.5 blocks an hour,

The irony that 1.5 blocks per hour = 12MB
Literally 2x legacy chain's capacity

Why would that tank the price?

>>3170582
e) BTC code is being rewritten so it adjusts it's difficulty more often

>>3170646
You can spot the retarded BCH shills by the fact that they don't understand how the blockchain works.

You think your coin is going to live when people are waiting 4x the amount for a confirmation? Delusional.

>inb4 muh 0-confs

>>3170660
Right, or a change in PoW, but that's very unlikely.

Is there any indication that the diff adjustment is actually gonna change in BTC?

>>3170660
That would be a hardfork. Core is in no position to make a successful hardfork.

>>3170679
Core has had a bunch of non-contentious hardforks, I can't see a diff adjustment being contentious if they start seeing what BCH will do to BTC in a few weeks time.

>>3170671
>You think your coin is going to live when people are waiting 4x the amount for a confirmation

1 hour and 40 minutes on average compared to the lottery of getting your transaction included into the legacy chain? Do you know how many people I had to help with transactions that weren't confirming for DAYS?

There's indeed someone here who doesn't know how bitcoin works but not me.

>>3170693
>Core has had a bunch of non-contentious hardforks

?!? Core had ONE hardfork at best, at that was before it was called Core, in August 2010, when a bug in Bitcoin allowed someone to create billions of bitcoins

You know softforks are not hardforks right?

>>3170707
>lottery

shit meme, back to r/btc. You already know BTC has their own solution to the fee problem and you're purposely creating strawmen now to prop up BCash.

>>3170693
Despite the fact that the BTC blockchain is more profitable to mine at the moment, isn't the BCH blockchain the most desirable one to mine in the long term anyway? Doesn't segwit + LN steal fees from miners?

>>3170726
Wrong. There was another hardfork that I witnessed in ~2013 due to an error in 0.8 not accepting blocks. Resolved within ~12 hours.

>>3170733
Yes, and implements LN fees instead (though these are unlikely to be filled and won't be filled by just miners anyway).

This doesn't matter though if BTC is the most profitable even with fees accounted for. That would only become an issue once BTC mining is done and it is a fee only system (post-block reward BTC).

>>3170726
>>3170751
Here's an article (which I just noticed was by Vitalik lol)

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/bitcoin-network-shaken-by-blockchain-fork-1363144448/

File: chinktalk.png (44KB, 635x332px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 635x332px

What did he mean by this?

>>3170442
Took you long enough.

BCC is going to win this fight because they're going to continue to pull hashing power from BTC at semi-regular intervals, until the mempool on BTC either becomes such a bastard that fees go through the roof, or miners get fed up with swapping chains and finally just choose which chain they want to mine.

BCC is forcing fence-sitters to choose sides by either wrecking both chains for the sake of scorched earth, or winning the long-term game by making BTC unreliable and expensive to transact with.

Either BCC wins, or no one wins, unless miners actively choose not to mine the chain in their best economic interest.

>>3170733
There are no fees on BCH either.

>>3170671
I just proposed this now from the top of my head. But this emergency difficulty readjustment is a powerful weapon.

What will happen to Litecoin if BTC loses to BCH in your opinion? There is no leach for Litecoin. It uses Scrypt.

So in a way it can become the true fully functional Segwit + LN version of Bitcoin. However it will have the downside of having the same vulnerability that caused BTC's demise in case a contentious hard fork exploits litecoin in the same way.

>>3170730
>You already know BTC has their own solution to the fee problem

There's no solution because a fee high enough to guarantee inclusion doesn't exist. That would require supply (block space) that expands with a high enough fee. With constant size it's LITERALLY a lottery. You're just hoping your fee is high enough to push enough number of people, who hope the same.

>Wrong. There was another hardfork that I witnessed in ~2013 due to an error in 0.8 not accepting blocks. Resolved within ~12 hours.

It was resolved by REVERSING it. The hardforked chain died as 0.7 chain accumulated more difficulty.

Also it was a bug, not an intentional non-contentious hardfork' you ignorant tripfag. In addition you wrote 'a bunch' so I know you actually meant softforks because you didn't know there was a difference.

>>3170835
>moving goalposts this hard

I never said it wasn't a bug, smart ass, I said hard fork. That doesn't imply anything else.

File: craze.jpg (20KB, 421x466px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 421x466px

I swear to God if BCC ends up ruining crypto I am going to go ballistic.

>>3170856
>not cashing out for fiat already

wew, is 10 lambos not enough.

deserve to lose that dollar

File: wall.png (3MB, 2152x1614px)

3MB, 2152x1614px

>>3170856
BCC has been sent to the wall already

>>3170847
It's disingenuous to imply that hard-forking to fix a bug is in any way equivalent to hard forking to change the difficulty adjustment algorithm (which isn't a bug by any stretch of the imagination).

>>3170847
That wasn't a hardfork in what is currently called Bitcoin because the hardforked chain died.

>I said hard fork

You wrote 'a bunch of non-contentious hardforks' which wouldn't apply even in the alternative universe where 0.8 version prevailed, as an accidental hardfork wouldn't be non-contentious.

>>3170887
All I said was non-contentious. Do you know what that means?

>>3170895
What are you calling that then?

>>3170897
Then it's disingenuous to imply that a hard fork to adjust difficulty algorithm would be non-contentious. Miner profitability relies on the difficulty adjustment remaining stable, changing it significantly would definitely impact mining profitability (most likely negatively).

File: file.png (120KB, 624x343px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 624x343px

Anyway, here's a list up to 2016. Apparently the 182 billion was softforked by rejecting the tx.

>>3170931
Yeah, and I claimed it would be non-contentious because if BCH keeps attacking BTC, miners (who only care about their income remaining stable) would want such a change.

File: Screenshot_20170823-035258.jpg (304KB, 1080x1990px) Image search: [Google]

304KB, 1080x1990px

Maybe I'm being impatient but I can't see any miners going back to BTC

>>3170582
so greed, in the end, is what destroys crypto
sad, bros

>>3170974
its seems like that 0.5% did leave

>>3170952
No they wouldn't. Miners don't care, because they get their profits either way. Pools have algorithms in place to automatically switch chains, no active decision needs to be made by miners as to which chain they'll mine, and the payout by the pool comes in a variety of choices of crypto, depending on the pool they're a part of.

I seriously doubt the average small-scale miner is in it for the idealism at this point; there's too much money to be made. This is all going to come down to the large miners, who all have more than enough BTC and BCC to be rich no matter which chain wins out; it'll be a matter of whether large miners will band together to centralize the BTC chain by scaling their operations to the point that small miners will no longer comprise a significant portion of the hashpower.

>>3170974
>
That's a 24 hour average.

Since BTC has been mining the last 12 hours at less than 3 blocks per hour (instead of the normal six) you can be sure that of the last 12 hours more than half left BTC.

>>3170974
Only 5 blocks have been mined since the adjustment, which was an hour ago. We went from 40 - 50 blocks an hour to having 5 (a ten-fold decrease, instead of the expected four-fold). It could just be "luck" or variance, so give it a few hours until you can actually see it.

>>3171015
10 now
481824 to 481833

SO what is up now?

File: images.duckduckgo.com.gif (44KB, 356x200px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 356x200px

so the flippening is off?from what i understand jihan is trying to put bitcoin through a series of attacks by using infastructure fees and confirmation times to congest and undermine bitcoin rather then just replacing bitcoin? should i sell? is there potential for that moon mission we had the other day?

File: dunce kid.jpg (33KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 500x500px

>>3171654
ill go sit in a corner

BCC climbing
$700+

File: 1503413335665m.jpg (127KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1024x1024px

>>3171983
Who else here is a fiatmarine?

>>3167733
>That doesn't mean shit globally because kikes don't have influence in markets other than the USA.
>kikes don't have influence in markets other than the USA.
Oh, you poor boy.

>>3167908
There were some sha256 coins that during PnD's could beat BTC profitability

>>3168283
What's the latest thing that your friend has recommended?

Guys whats going to happen to price in the coming weeks/month of btc and bch? asking for a friend

>>3167272
You mean the one 90% guy is gonna keep mining it. Others only moved because of the price. Nobody gives a shit about your block size. Nobody gives a shit about core. They want money.

>>3172515

So why hasn't the hash rate dropped off in the 3 hours since profitability fell?

>>3172515
Everyone has access to see whos mining and that data is making you look like a fucking retard.

>>3172523
It has. Only ~6 blocks have been mined per hour since the difficulty adjustment. It should be double that (adjustment was capped at +300% when it should have been more than +600%, which means up to half the miners have dropped off, or variance has caused bad luck).

Charts work off last n average, so it will be reflected in the coming day.

So you people are saying to get out of BCC now while I still can?

>>3172619
I mean, miners are appearantly moving away from BCC again and the 8mb is gonna cripple the mining process if I understood it correctly(?)

>>3172675
So wait let me make this clear. You're saying to sell all your bcc into the real bitcointm BTC and use the lightning network as often as possible?

>>3172619
It'll be getting another Korean pump just about now ( https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitcoin-cash/#markets ) , but long term BTC is almost certainly a safer bet.

>>3172688
Alright, gonna wait for the top of the pump and then get out I don't know about you guys but I really doubt that BTC can be overtaken by a fork at this point. There is too much "brand recognition".

Ethically, I'm more on BCC's side but I can't afford it right now.

>>3172569
Moon man pls respond >>3172374

>>3172795
As if you would behave differently it you could "afford" to, Monica. I don't understand why you fake faggots put on airs here. There's no karma or brownie points to hoard.

>>3173001
His hard on is still full for ETH.

>Hash power didn't go anywhere
>Price still rising
>All the predictions the OP made were wrong

>>3167998
alt-right is white supremacists, you are mistaken

People are speculating on BCH, but keeping reserves on BTC.

Its that simple.

File: nnccc.jpg (33KB, 318x359px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 318x359px

>Ever choosing Bitcoin over bitcoin cash

You money seeking fucks are ruining crypto.

Am I ever getting my BTC to an exchange? Sent it about 10 hours ago still 0 confirmations.

>>3173747
miners are moving back to btc. should be an interesting week

>>3173323
>Hash power didn't go anywhere
Wrong. Only 8.25 blocks mined per hour (on average) since the fork. Multiply that by 4 to get how many would have been mined pre adjustment and you get 33. We were over 40 blocks per hour pre-retarget. It's already leaking.

>Price still rising
Never said it was guaranteed to drop, only that it had to rise to prevent losing hashing power. Price drop follows miners leaving, read the fucking post. Price drop will follow the hashrate bleed and accelerate, then the cycle will repeat.

File: 1475887686001.jpg (38KB, 807x689px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 807x689px

>>3170974

Site?