BCH

JuicedRacingTwitch

>As evidenced by the current values of all the various hard forks we've already gotten. Because the miners determine which fork is the true fork, and it does not matter as the original holders before the fork own both. I have BCH even though I never believed in or bought any of that shit. You seem to not understand how BTC works and you're not aware of it's history either.

No-Masterpiece2246

What? 10k per second is amazing. As I said, Bitcoin can only do 6. BCH can do 150, DOGE around the same. There are a few centralized coins like Ripple that can do fast transactions, but those premined coins are not cryptocurrencies.

No-Masterpiece2246

You're overestimating the power of governments to regulate and control crypto. Trump's coin is not crypto. Stablecoins are not crypto. XRP is not crypto. Uncensorable decentralized networks like ETH, XMR, BCH, SOL, LTC, etc are crypto.

Spazero

Well I dont see Eth disappearing anytime soon. Nor BTC, BCH, or many of the rest of them. It just depends on how serious people become about it. The Dollar is controlled, and maybe that's fine. Id rather hold an asset that doesn't easily depreciate though. So many do. Crypto is just humanities attempt to make money more modern. What will win in the end? The market tends to decide, though people can be powerful influencing factors.

Revolutionary-Cup78

I would find it extremely unexpected for asset currency to ever again become the predominant mean of exchange. This applies for both physical currency (like the example you mentioned) and digital currency (BTC, BCH, ETH, etc)

Crypto-Bets

The market is consolidating. With the dominance of stablecoins, businesses dont need BCH or LTC for everyday payments.

xblackdemonx

BCH is junk

LongtermSuccess

By restoring 100% of script functionalities that were historically disabled, the fork positions BCH to compete directly with modern Layer 1s enabling developers to write complex DeFi protocols, stablecoin contracts, and NFT logic.

No-Masterpiece2246

The UX is just horrible, and payments fail all of the time. It can't be used for very small payments (nodes don't want it), and big payments don't work either (insufficient liquidity). In short, 7 years of wasted time and effort. Moral is: pay onchain with low fees on any other coin like LTC, BCH, DOGE, XMR, etc.

PlutoPlaneta

> Whats to stop me from solo mining something like BCH? Usually the part where electricity is not free and you don't want an expensive hobby but a profit.

RoseOasis

This was very hard to get my head around. I finally sold all my BCH and spread it into other coins with growth potential and I'm so much happier.

terp_studios

r/BTC has nothing to do with actual bitcoin. It was taken over by BCH bagholders a while ago.

Supaflyray

Just doesn’t make sense to me, when we have hard forks like BCH. At the end of the day, the miners choose what what coin to mine is my point. If someone develops something the community doesn’t like, miners just go to the other chain. No?

TheGreatCryptopo

Another bullshit fork will go the same route as the turd coin BCH but what the fuck a free airdrop. If initially it does well then a quick buck for the lucky BTC holders.

frozengrandmatetris

nice try. I have no BCH. I am a sidechain guy who wants covenant opcodes.

LuckyWinds

Nice regurgitation of BCH talking points. Bitcoin adoption is growing. You might think that businesses offering bitcoin financial products is a negative, but I don't.

roctac

Yes. BCH for the win!

LovelyDayHere

> If you make a transaction on eCash Would recommend writing "Paul Storcz's fork" instead of "eCash". At least the eCash (XEC) fork is replay-protected against BTC by virtue of being a descendent of BitcoinCash (BCH). This new fork is just a hazard.

igoldring

GNO, AAVE, STX, INJ, & ZBCN. GNO seems to be my safe bet at this point, it’s consolidating at 2022 bear market lows and its relation to ETH. AAVE is still the leader in DeFi and you could add Morpho if you’re looking to diversify in that sector. STX being approved by the SEC for their ICO is a plus for me. INJ I like here for R/R ratio. ZBCN is a very interesting due to their payroll and streamlined payments as a real time payroll/streaming finance infrastructure. **I spoke on these from another thread and INJ and ZBCN are up a bit from time of post but regardless I still like these. If you’re looking for dino coins like the four you mentioned, I’d prefer LINK, BCH, LTC, and DASH over those tbh; at least we know they’ll be around regardless.

ReasonablePossum_

That only goes for the BCH. Not btc

DangerHighVoltage111

Yep, long way to go :) Good thing BCH is still secure enough. Let's see who deals with the Security Budged problem better. >Segwit increases the block size to 4mb, by the way. Maybe for ape jpgs but not for monetary transactions. The amount of monetary transactions per block stayed the same after segwit. Still only 4 tps or 0.005% of the population per day. (that's 73 years for everyone to make a single transaction)

DangerHighVoltage111

>BCH is so old, Doesn't matter, you fight as long as it takes to change the crooked system to sound p2p cash. From the very few blockchains that can be sound money BCH is the most advanced one. If you want change, BCH is your best bet. >I said, nobody needs it And this is where you are wrong, kiddo. Everybody needs sound money.

baIIern

BCH is so old, it will never catch on. There was plenty of time. It's just a small bubble for some enthusiasts with unrealistic dreams 🤷‍♂️ As I said, nobody needs it (except for a few people who still dream)

baIIern

I can't pay with BCH anywhere and I also don't think this will change much. Nobody cares.

cr0ft

I mean, objectively speaking BTC is an atrocious crypto. Unbelievably slow and managed by either lunatics or active saboteurs, not sure which. A coin that can only transact 6 times per second isn't a coin at all. At least the people behind BCH tried their hardest to get BTC to accept a larger block size to alleviate congestion, and when all else failed they forked. BTC today can't even use the original whitepaper. Current day BTC no longer matches it, what with Segwit and other shenanigans. And it still has the 6 tps issue too.

baIIern

The world needs this coin as much as it needs BCH 🤷‍♂️

CoffeeAlternative647

That's what happened to OP but he sold BTC instead and is on a spree for years shilling BCH. You should see his posts and comments at r/btc. Better than r/funnymemes

anymonero

If they sold BCH when it came out, they never had any BSV.

DangerHighVoltage111

Everything but BCH again 🤷‍♂️. Unfortunately ETH went PoS, so it is not a sound alternative anymore.

God_Hand_9764

Man, I remember when BCH came out, talk about some easy free money. I sold almost immediately and then it tanked. I wonder if there is a list anywhere of similar hardforks and their values? Are there any out there which could still be worth something significant? Will have to remember to keep my eye on eCash.

Choice_Potato_6279

I thought it was the official Bitcoin site but then I looked and it accepted all kind of shitcoins so I was wtf Bitcoin devs would never do that, then realized it's the BCH site lmao

Bagmasterflash

No. BCH is taking the quantum threat seriously and making improvements to harden against it.

pop-1988

Exclude everything that was launched as an airdrop by fraudulently inheriting the prior history of Bitcoin - BCH, BTG Exclude everything centralized by design - XRP and similar entrepreneurial projects Exclude everything centralized by outcome, because their blockchains are so bloated that nodes are expensive to run, which makes the node network very small - ETH and all the other so-called "smart chains" This leaves BTC, NMC, LTC, DOGE, XMR In recent years, apathy has led to developers drifting away from LTC and DOGE. They both still have large-enough node networks to be decentralized. But each of them is only one Core bug away from having zero nodes > the Price is volatile So? The price market isn't relevant to the question The software which runs on each Bitcoin node has no price-related functions The gold analogy is ludicrous

bastaja1337

BCH also has some upgrade coming. Might go back to 600+ soon as well.

hf12323

BCH is a fat loser and has body odor!!

LoveSexDraems

I currently have around 0.25 BNB and 0.25 BCH. Maybe I should hop on the bitcoin wagon again. It’s just hard to hold for me

ByWillAlone

I mined most of my Bitcoin between 2012 and 2015. I also own original BCH (Bitcoin cash) because the Bitcoin blockchain was forked in 2017 to get Bitcoin cash off the ground. I didn't actually mine any bitcoins on my own, I was in a mining guild that collectively found lots and paid everyone in Bitcoin for the work of sifting through blocks that didn't contain coins. Do I need to show block chain transactions as evidence now whenever I claim I've been holding for 11+ years?

Specialist_Play_4479

It is. The majority has to agree. What will happen is: 1. At some moment in time this proposal is implemented in code. Or the idea is abandoned entirely and nothing happens. 2. Bitcoin node operators now have to choose: Install update or keep at current codebase. If enough operators upgrade to the new code, the operators that don't will end up with non functioning nodes, as they will be forwarding transactions/blocks that newer software deems invalid So if they don't want this implemented, they will have to fork. A new bitcoin will emerge. Something like BitcoinOld, BitcoinQuantumUnsafe (BQU!) or whatever. This is essentially what happened with BCH. BCH is a fork of BTC. 3. Other node operators that do agree will install the updated code and that's it. BTC continues as it always has. So basically.. if enough people disagree BTC will fork into a new coin and it remains to be seen which one will survive in the long run. BCH is worth a fraction of BTC, so it kind of failed. Same with ETC and ETHPoW. Both are hardforks from Ethereum. Both are worth pennies to their Ethereum equivalent.

arcreactors

I don’t understand how anyone is against this. If it’s a soft fork, people might get an extra coin like with BCH - and that’s before thinking if safety and future proofing And if not, still the Network gets more equalized. Are multi-billionaires literally needed? If legacy wallets won’t need their coins the next 5 years, then presumably it’s not life urgent money at this point

DangerHighVoltage111

> You sort of contradict yourself when you say on one hand that you don’t see it as an investment and on the other say it’s worth the risk Read again, you left out part of the quotes. Which leads me to end this here. I don't think you are discussion in good faith. >BCH is useless. It’s going nowhere. Further strengthening the bad fait vibe.

darthmcdarthface

You sort of contradict yourself when you say on one hand that you don’t see it as an investment and on the other say it’s worth the risk. Further leading towards scam territory. What are you risking and what’s the payoff? How is that not an investment? BCH is useless. It’s going nowhere. It doesn’t fill a need in the market. It has no value aside from the scammers and scam-ees pumping it

FYATWB

> Ah yes, now we get to the bottom of your post. In reality there is only a handful of sound PoW blockchains You know B Cash hash rate is 5.87 ExaHash and Bitcoin hash rate is 1141 ExaHash right? How "sound" is the security on that shitchain that Bitcoin's mining power is 20000% higher? You could hijack the entire Btrash chain with less than ONE PERCENT of Bitcoin mining power. Does that sound secure to you? There's a reason one uses BCH, you are a walking sunk cost fallacy if you still support it. At any point in the past 8 years you could have traded your shitcoin for real Bitcoin and you would be up on your investment. I'm sorry you got duped, I'm sorry you wasted your time and money, may god have mercy on you.

DangerHighVoltage111

> The scam is in selling you on a terrible investment. See that's the difference. I don't see it as an investment that has to immediately pay off in dollars. If it pays off I won't even need to sell by BCH. And yes the chances for a successful p2p cash revolution aren't stellar, but it is worth the risk.

DangerHighVoltage111

Meanwhile BCH: We will be QC safe in May but we will not touch any coins without the keys. We do not fear the 1.7M coins being released if not moved. and BTC: Please Ser, we need to block these coins or it could crash our value.

fan_of_hakiksexydays

The two guys leading BCH and BSV got into a beef, and got the main BCH and BSV miners to dump their holdings (which was mainly BTC plus other coins), to finance their hash war.

Realistic_Fee_00001

This could not be further from the truth and is just your projection from the wider crypto market onto a coin that you don't like. BCH is very much like monero only driven against the odds by its community and the desire for sound money. No premine, no VC money (like blockstream) no big cooperation, no elon marketing. You wouldn't believe a community could built this stuff by grassroot financing. And of course you won't believe it. To see this all you need to do is visit the BCH groups and channels and join the development talk. Is there a desire to increase in value? Of course but just the fact that the BCH channel has 6 times the user count than the BCH price channel on telegram should tell you where the priorities are.

boringtired

ATLEAST make it like BCH so we can make out like bandits again please.

Realistic_Fee_00001

> it wasn't ever going to be used for global payment processing with 10 minute block times. That's why 0-conf exists and BCH made it even safer as it already was. Just listen to this: r/btc/comments/1kjz8zb/the_only_reason_they_killed_0conf_on_btc_is/ BTC worked as p2p cash before it was crippled and blocks got full. >and BCH is pointless now. Ah yes, now we get to the bottom of your post. In reality there is only a handful of sound PoW blockchains and only a few of them try to offer a better MoE system to the current crooked fiat one. And from them the one with the best tech is BCH.

FYATWB

While I don't think BTC should have ended up as strictly a store of value or hedge against inflation, it wasn't ever going to be used for global payment processing with 10 minute block times. BTC crawled so other faster and smarter chains could walk and run today, and BCH is pointless now.

Realistic_Fee_00001

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convince people that hard forks are bad and Bitcoin can't scale. BCH regularly delivers advanced tech on all fronts, stayed true to the p2p cash goal and yet because BTC captured the media attention and slandered BCH, people are to lazy to even look into it.

Realistic_Fee_00001

And you can't even get the name right. It's BCH or Bitcoin Cash and neither did they fuck up, nor did they centralize. BTC: https://mempool.space/graphs/mining/pools vs BCH: https://bchexplorer.cash/graphs/mining/pools Quite to the contrary Knotters currently demonstrate how centralized BTCs development is. Something BCH has overcome years ago already.

DangerHighVoltage111

Pretty bullish imo. The only thing bearish on BCH is the slander it gets.

tooandto

The rollout on Coinbase after the fork was absolutely criminal, pumping that garbage to almost 0.5 BTC. The geniuses over in r/BTC at the time, (inconceivably a BCH sub), were pushing the flippening- a ridiculous fantasy about a death spiral event for BTC. Some of those poor idiots took the bait. Imagine trading BTC for BCH at 0.5 in 2017 then holding it til now. On its way to zero. Ouch.

rgnet1

If a consensus isn't reached then there will be two forks - bitcoin that doesn't freeze the addresses and one that does. It'll be BTC/BCH again. The miners, the users, the exchanges to some extent, will decide. That's what open source is, that's what a truly democratized and decentralized project is.

zenethics

You may not care, but if you spend from an old address like that I'm pretty sure you lose access to forks (BCH, BSV, whatever else). At least, someone can replay the BTC transaction on the altcoin network if the chain is compatible. There are protocols for spending those chains first but depending on the size of the position I don't know if I'd bother, personally. Actually, I certainly wouldn't, it's not worth the risk. Otherwise I'm not personally aware of any issues. I would guess that the attack vector they are talking about is a hypothetical future quantum attack. Hypothetical. Other than that, the only thing that comes to mind is that you'll have to pay more in fees to spend from old addresses because of the data footprint. GL

HSuke

Why would BCH's mining crash all crypto prices? What's the causation?

DangerHighVoltage111

Idk BCH and Monero seem pretty popular to me.

Revolutionary-Cup78

No no no, that BS is only said on the Bitcoin reddit, toxic/dumb optimism. BTC is by no means a safe investment (tho it is my personal opinion that it is the least risky crypto to hold long term). There is a very genuine risk that 50 years (random example) from now it could be worth less than the (adjusted for inflation) current value, the network could crumble to near 0, etc. If many forks emerge, a backdoor managing to slip by (getting full schizo, bitmain getting compromised on a hardware level and no one noticing on time), quantum computers dumping the contents of dormant wallets, etc. It could be replaced by newer projects, failing the test of time, forgotten, never to be learned by future generations (do you know the brand of the first commercially available car? what about motorcycles and bicycles?). As is, BTC is no longer the most liquid crypto, as the first place for the highest traded volume crypto was already claimed by Tether USD. Only the blindest of fanatics still believe BTC will become common used currency for daily activities, and most of them are BCH chills, there is not even full unity/agreement on what truly is Bitcoin

DangerHighVoltage111

I'm a p2p casher, holding BCH and Monero. Do you have anything else than personal attacks? >Also I've followed and been in BCH probably far longer than you've first heard about alt coins. Yet you seem to know shit all 🤷‍♂️

fan_of_hakiksexydays

Tell me you're a bagholder. Also I've followed and been in BCH probably far longer than you've first heard about alt coins.

DangerHighVoltage111

Tell me you know nothing about Bitcoin Cash.... This updates have been done regularly https://minisatoshi.cash/upgrade-history without a fuss. BCH has invented a process called CHIP which aims to create the biggest consensus about the updates beforehand. Updates go through seamless. Contrary to BTCs slander this is not centralized and any party can actually peel of and do their own thing (as has happend) Contrary to softforks which activates no matter if you like it or not. Giving developers of the reverence client (Core) disproportionate power.

fan_of_hakiksexydays

Another chapter of the BCH shitshow. To be fair, it has given us some of the most epic shitshows in crypto history. But their centralized mining shitshow did almost crash the whole market in 2019, all cryptos took a plunge, and it made BTC dive from $6K down to $3.4K.

kobriks

It won't happen. We will get another BCH like quantum-resistant wannabe fork that everyone will ignore.

anon1971wtf

Depends on will miners mine it or not, same with BTC/BCH, same with Knots movement seemingly reaching conclusion in August

Bagmasterflash

All the smart ones defected to BCH in 1017

RoseOasis

I would sell the BCH I accidentally bought in 2021 while it was up. It's headed to worthless now and I still don't know what to do.

tornavec

I'd like to say you did everything right, but I didn't see any staking. On Bitcoin alone you missed out on up to 40% annual returns. I'm going by the interest rates on my own platform, Cryptomus—you could find even higher ones if you're a risk-taker. But you know what else doesn't add up about your story? I started buying crypto back in 2017, too. And I always remember how BCH just "fell from the sky" for me. You don't say a word about that. Did you not think your cover story through?

Blockchainauditor

Check out “beer money” crypto faucets, like Cointiply or Faucet Gamers. Answer a few surveys, earn $5 of BTC, send to your wallet. One issue with BTC is transaction fees, which are based on UTXOs and not dollar value - it will cost more than 20 cents to send 20 cents. Can you test your idea with 20 cents of BCH? That’s a lot cheaper to send.

No-Masterpiece2246

Typical dev vibes, so elite. As if devs are even needed anymore? Bitcoin devs have done nothing but shit since Segwit. They've actively made Bitcoin worse. To be fair, BCH devs have done some impressive work. But Core team, lol. Bunch of CIA clowns.

Steeltalons71

I'm waiting until I've mined enough to actually use for something nice. $41 in XMR and $48 in BCH do far...

BioRobotTch

BCH seems to always be adding interesting tech. They won the techies mindset in the blockchain war.

TheGreatCryptopo

If crypto was the movie Twins BCH would be Danny de Vito.

DangerHighVoltage111

BCH will put this on mainchain in May. https://news.bitcoin.com/quantumroot-debuts-on-bitcoin-cash-first-post-quantum-vault-on-bitcoin-script/

EndSmugnorance

The fact this is still a discussion frustrates me. If BTC had adopted big blocks in 2017, we *would* actually see adoption with low transaction fees. But nooo we’re still debating whether Bitcoin can be used as a *currency* because greedy small-blockers won. 🙄 BCH should have been Bitcoin.

Bagmasterflash

Trade BCH with nearly any pair you would want to on bchbull.com. 100% on chain. 100% as anonymous as you want to be.

benditbackwards

Isn't this a really old debate?? Why should I care now?? Anyone want some BCH?? :)

ReliantToker

What happens to BCH when individuals can no longer afford to run nodes?

CryptCranker0808

> The inflation bug was found long before that unless you’re talking about something else? The original inflation bug (integer underflow) was July, 2010. The BTC inflation bug found by the BCH dev was found in 2018, first put in place by a 2016 code change.

Own_Condition_4686

BitCoin at Home (BCH)

CryptCranker0808

Don't forget the periods in 2009 where almost no blocks were produced for hours (the network was dependent on Satoshi), the six hour fork rollback in 2010, the time when Bitfury alone controlled more than 50% of the hash power, or the inflation bug present for two years in 2016 found by a BCH dev. Bitcoin has had issues like all coins.

EndSmugnorance

BCH is this easy (assuming the merchant accepts BCH) But BTC maxis still refuse to accept larger blocksize & 0-conf matters.

bpg2001bpg

>BCH is a better alternative in every way.  Temu Bitcoin?

wraithoffaith

My bet is on BCH, DOT and ADA. BCH is the safest bet tho and the other two are more risk more reward.

GentlemenHODL

>BCH is a better alternative in every way. It's still amazes me that all these years later you are still alive and breathing. How regarded you must be.

roctac

LN broken and doesn't work. On top of that L1 fees are stupid high and clogged up. BCH is a better alternative in every way.

DangerHighVoltage111

Some of this is developed on BCH some on otherchains. Nothing from your examples is done on BTC. Isn't that strange? The Trilemma isn't a fixed thing. The 1MB block of 2009 is the 100mb block of today. Which mean the trilemma, even if true, might not be met if adoption is not faster than technical advancements. Sorry for the butchered links but reddit is censoring dictator. Search for these to find the article. - @mtrycz/how-my-rpi4-handles-1m-tx-blocks-ad8c4c94 - @mtrycz/how-my-rpi4-handles-mining-1gb-blocks-e5d09d83 __Yet BTC does absolutely nothing to scale its base layer.__ In fact they are working on spamming it more, see the current debate. Isn't that strange... The trilemma, like LN were red herrings to allow them to cripple the base layer which also shifted the narrative away from p2p cash to NgU and subsequently stifled adoption a p2p cash. Imagine where we would be if BTC had allowed reasonable blocksize increase and this hadn't happened: https://i.imgur.com/Mua26Ic.jpeg Imagine if all that brain drain hadn't happend and BTC were allowed to continue adoption as p2p cash. You would be able to pay your games on steam with BTC for 8 years by now.

DangerHighVoltage111

Hard forks are freedom. You cannot get away from a captured chain without a hardfork. BCH hardforked multiple times since 2017 with little problems. The times it chainsplit was exactly when egomaniacs threatened to destroy the chain. Better split from that manipulating, abusing ex instead of sticking with them to keep the piece....

powerform1

Honestly, you've done a good job at trying to diversify. Nowadays though I think BTC only is the best strat. ETH as the #2 really hasn't seen a lot of growth in the long term if we're looking at previous performance. All other coins are gambles. Sell all and just put into BTC or if you'd like BCH 5 - 10%, even then you're probably still better off going 100% Bitcoin. The gov will soon be coming after your in Bitcoin so please just stack as much as you can. Also read the Bitcoin Standard, you will then understand how much your holdings will be worth in the long term. Hope this helps.

longonbtc

Roger Ver actually didn't go to prison. He entered into a deferred prosecution agreement with the Justice Department to resolve federal charges against him. He simply had to pay the IRS almost $50 million in back taxes, penalties, and interest and the case was closed. Other than that, you're correct. Some of the bcashers paid as much as 0.3 BTC for each single BCH after the chain split. The bcashers need to keep tricking more newbies into believing that BCH is the real Bitcoin and get them to buy their heavy BCH bags.

longonbtc

They wanted Bitcoin Cash to be Bitcoin and they wanted the ticker symbol for Bitcoin Cash to be BTC. That's why you'll often see them over there claiming that BCH is the real Bitcoin and BTC is the fork. But all they managed to get was the r/btc subreddit and that's only because Roger Ver purchased that subreddit from the person that created it. Then he filled it with his own moderators and that subreddit has been used to promote BCH and spread misinformation & propaganda about bitcoin ever since.

Fritzbox5000

Especially the second point is important. Fewer nodes means centralisation by few big companies who can afford to run such nodes. There is no plausible answer by big blockers to this problem so far imo. While BCH enthusiasts assume a conspiracy by small blockers to push bitcoin to layer 2 solutions with possible kyc threats, I think that the market just had more demand of BTC as SoV. It's still the better solution compared to big blocks with node/audit centralisation.

Thomas5020

r/btc is mostly a bitcoin cash subreddit. You \*can\* talk about whatever you want, but if you don't think BCH is the best thing since sliced bread you'll probably get downvoted.

Fritzbox5000

I'm undecided as well. I listened to both arguments and both seem plausible to a certain degree. If you increase the block size, transactions will get faster, but a node will increase in size as well. This increase will be so huge, according to BTC maximalists, that only large companies could afford to run such a big node, leading to centralisation. If you keep the block size, transactions become slow and you rely on L2 third party technologies like the Lightning Network to buy a coffee instantly, which also means centralisation. So Bitcoin itself becomes rather a store of value, the digital gold, rather than a P2P cash system. There are some upgrades like SegWit to improve transaction speed and still, it's a problem which cannot be solved without a second layer. I still tend to favour BTC over BCH since I don't see a big problem in using the Lightning Network similar to PayPal to do smaller transactions and use the main layer for bigger transactions. An increase of the block size and hence the reduction of verification nodes in the hands of big companies are a much bigger threat than the Lightning Network, because it would put the Proof of Work aspect in danger, at least imo. I don't think that an increase in Bitcoin above 21 million would ever happen. It is one of the flagship properties of Bitcoin and investors would immediately sell their Bitcoin if such news would even circulate. Yes, it is code which can be forked and in fact, BCH and BTV are actually hard forks, but the "original" BTC still exists, because the owners of BTC don't have any interest in such changes. It's still a difficult topic nonetheless.

Fritzbox5000

I watched a German Bitcoin video about the block size matter. The argument was that an increase of the block size would increase the size of a single node from 500gb to such an astronomical size that only big companies could run such a node, resulting in fewer nodes for verification and hence centralisation. On the other hand, longer transactions (like in the current state of Bitcoin) would make a third party like the Lightning Network necessary to make smaller payments like buying a coffee. A third party, however, violates the P2P character of Bitcoin envisioned by Satoshi Nakamoto. As far as I know, BCH, BSV and the Lightning Network were all created around 2017, after the Block Size War, to tackle the problem of slow transactions. What is your opinion on the topic?

Slick424

The fundamental problem isn't the size of a block, but the fact that a hard fork is required to change it. The ultimate power of the hard fork and how it is governed is still an open question today. There is a great risk in opening that door without having it well guarded 1. Egomaniacs create their own forks and call it the true bitcoin, which happened right after the creation of BCH with BSV (Bitcoin "Satoshi Vision") 2. Powerful interest groups pushing for changes to benefit themselves. z.B.: Miners demanding the removal of the halving cycles.

uncapchad

yeah GPU mining with an ordinary laptop is very unlikely to be profitable. Take a look at GRIN, it does need it's own mining hardware (the iPollo G1 Mini is around $400) and GRIN's price is fairly constant. Other POWS such as XLM, BCH, DGB, LTC, DOGE you'd need more expensive mining equipment. Although very old coins they often make one or two significant moves in a bull-run so they're good to have in reserve

AutoModerator

Post is by: Bcom_Mod and the url/text [ ](https://goo.gl/GP6ppk)is: /r/bitcoin_com/comments/1s1a9jj/regulatory_clarity_just_dropped_btc_is_ranging_at/ Something worth thinking about after this week's SEC/CFTC guidance: one of the biggest reasons businesses have dragged their feet on accepting crypto payments isn't technical. It's legal uncertainty. If nobody could agree on whether the token you're accepting is a commodity or a security or something else entirely, why would a small business owner touch it? That excuse just got a lot weaker. With most tokens now officially outside securities classification and under cleaner CFTC oversight, the compliance conversation for merchants gets dramatically simpler. "We accept Bitcoin" no longer needs three paragraphs of legal caveats attached to it. The tools to actually do this have existed for a while too. The [Bitcoin.com Checkout app](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.bitcoin.checkout) has been sitting on the Play Store letting merchants accept BTC, BCH, ETH and stablecoins directly at point of sale. No custodian, no middleman, settlements straight to your wallet. The tech side has never really been the bottleneck. The bottleneck has always been "what happens to us legally if we do this." That question got a cleaner answer this week than it's had in ten years. Broader merchant adoption has been "just around the corner" since 2014 so I'm not going to sit here and call it. But the combination of regulatory clarity, a maturing stablecoin infrastructure, and a global wartime moment that reminded everyone what borderless money actually does. If that doesn't move the needle, nothing will. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoMarkets) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Illustrious-Boss9356

I actually own some BCH which I kept from the fork. As well as a tiny but of Cardano because I liked the idea of smart contracts on a UTXO-chain. But I'm eating shit on those pretty hard but it's ok because like 99% of my crypto is BTC.

bitcoincashautist

It doesn't! The contract system supports compact signatures until quantum day, migration to post-quantum later on, and signature aggregation. It can use smaller one-time signatures because BCH has L1 native tokens (since '23), so we can use account abstraction to have a pay-to-nft address, and owner can have a constant receiving address while still rotating his one-time keys on every spend: >While SLH‑DSA‑SHA2‑128s (SPHINCS+) signatures weigh in at 7,856 bytes, CashToken-based delegation and Bitcoin Cash's UTXO model allow Quantumroot to use LM-OTS signatures (RFC 8554) – improving quantum security, while also reducing signature sizes (2,180 bytes) and preventing on-chain privacy leaks. Since the fork, BCH has been busy upgrading, it now has L1 native tokens and Script VM to rival EVM, and adaptive blocksize limit algorithm.

Cryptizard

But it lowers the throughput of the network by 50x because of the increased signature sizes. The entire point of BCH forking from BTC was because they wanted a larger block size and more transactions per block. Moving to post-quantum signatures brings it back down to _fewer transactions per block than BTC_. So what is the point of BCH then?