Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Private profiles - please note that profiles marked as private will soon be public. This will facilitate moderation so mods can view users' warning histories. All of your posts across the site will appear on your profile page (including PI, RI). Groups posts will remain private except to users who have access to the same Groups as you. Thread here
Some important site news, please read here. Thanks!

Bitcoin Cash

  • 07-11-2017 10:02am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 2,327 ✭✭✭ The One Doctor


    I've been trying to diversify my coin 'portfolio' for the last few days. I have 0.5 BTC after pulling €700 from it in 'profit' and have a final €1000 to invest.

    So another €1700 to play with and that's it, no more fiat inputs.

    Bitcoin Cash looks interesting, although it seems a lot more volatile than BTC. What interests me is:

    1. Potential BTC drop after the fork, people pumping their BTC into alts.
    2. Coinbase announcing that trading of BCH will start 01/01/18.

    Since Coinbase (of which I have my BTC with) only deals in BTC, ETH and LTC, the addition of BCH means that they have quite a lot of faith in it.

    Also, with the membership of Coinbase growing dramatically, quite a lot of capital could flow from CB users's BTC and other alts into BCH, especially since BCH has a relatively high price for an alt right now (~€520).

    Any opinions on my logic? Is anyone thinking similar? Any other alts worth a look?


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,266 ✭✭✭ djan


    Out of curiosity, where did you read that Coinbase will support trading of BCH? All i can find is that they will enable BCH withdrawals for accounts that were credited with it during the fork.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,327 ✭✭✭ The One Doctor


    djan wrote: »
    Out of curiosity, where did you read that Coinbase will support trading of BCH? All i can find is that they will enable BCH withdrawals for accounts that were credited with it during the fork.

    It appear I read the blog incorrectly. Trading will follow 'at a later stage'. Oops. Thanks for the correction.

    However the rest of the question stands. Do any alts catch the eye?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,327 ✭✭✭ The One Doctor


    I'm thinking €550 each for ETH, LTC and possibly BCH.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,651 ✭✭✭✭ machiavellianme


    I've been trying to diversify my coin 'portfolio' for the last few days. I have 0.5 BTC after pulling €700 from it in 'profit' and have a final €1000 to invest.

    So another €1700 to play with and that's it, no more fiat inputs.

    Bitcoin Cash looks interesting, although it seems a lot more volatile than BTC. What interests me is:

    1. Potential BTC drop after the fork, people pumping their BTC into alts.
    2. Coinbase announcing that trading of BCH will start 01/01/18.

    Since Coinbase (of which I have my BTC with) only deals in BTC, ETH and LTC, the addition of BCH means that they have quite a lot of faith in it.

    Also, with the membership of Coinbase growing dramatically, quite a lot of capital could flow from CB users's BTC and other alts into BCH, especially since BCH has a relatively high price for an alt right now (~€520).

    Any opinions on my logic? Is anyone thinking similar? Any other alts worth a look?

    Can't see any reason to back it over any other alt.
    To be honest, Coinbase are only adding it because there'd be blood on thesstreets if they pocketed it from customers accounts who held it there during the fork. Wouldn't think it's to do with them valuing it any higher or lower than any other alternative.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,072 ✭✭✭ ZeroThreat


    Can't see any reason to back it over any other alt.
    To be honest, Coinbase are only adding it because there'd be blood on thesstreets if they pocketed it from customers accounts who held it there during the fork. Wouldn't think it's to do with them valuing it any higher or lower than any other alternative.

    I know it's only worth something paltry like about $150 each (or maybe less), but will it ever be possible to claim bitcoin gold tokens?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,327 ✭✭✭ The One Doctor


    Ah frig it, I'm just going to wait for bitcoin to slump after the fork and buy back in.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,651 ✭✭✭✭ machiavellianme


    Soaring again. Up 30% since yesterday morning. What gives?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 657 Shauny2010


    Hardfork on May the 15th. I find this one very interesting as it sets Bitcoin cash back up to more or less the original bitcoin. Some but not all of the op codes are being reactivated, bigger block size again. Their seems to be a lot more upgrades on the Bitcoin Cash network over the next few months. I suspect that it will evolve and improve at a much faster rate than bitcoin.
    Its continuing its gains against Bitcoin, now up to 0.14 Btc, if these Hardforks go well then it will increase even more


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,026 ✭✭✭ grindle


    One thing older BTC stalwarts need to keep in mind is that more and more newbs are entering every day and they don't really care about BTC unless it was something they've already pumped a lot of cash into. Most resistance seems to be from Blockstream-heads and buyers post-BCH fork. The longer this market goes on for, the less the BTC brand will hook people.

    This is the way it's meant to work. The idea that some dopes are trying to pin Ver for fraud (and I'm not a great fan of his) because he's touting OSS the way it's supposed to be used is disorienting. Every BTC fork is Bitcoin in some form but we know which ones are bullshít. BCH is the least bullshítty (but still has it's fair share thanks to CSW) and might win.
    It's a race for adoption vs a race for market cap growth by institutional investors.
    It's interesting that we get to watch it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 657 Shauny2010


    I think it has more organized development in the pipeline. Bitcoin looks like chaos in development terms. My own opinion is that segwit is a mistake as it takes transactions off chain.
    Off chain is off chain, you might as well stick with visa or traditional fiat if your going down that road.
    No real institutional investors in cryptos yet. The whole market is retail investors and old whales


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,026 ✭✭✭ grindle


    Well, it has more teams working on it at the very least. Many devs working on many sides of the equation and let's see what they manage to do (though they are trying to compete with Ethereum and now NEO in a minor way soaking up lots of devs).
    Core has settled on being the security side of the main BTC chain and let sidechains try to root into it somehow. That seems like a crazy bet but maybe it'll work?


  • Registered Users Posts: 355 ✭✭ HorseSea


    Revolut banking had added Bitcoin Cash as the fourth crypto you can buy on their app.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,062 ✭✭✭ Kenny Logins


    Why are they so eager to increase the block sizes? There's no need for it at the moment, or in the near future..?

    https://txhighway.com/


  • Registered Users Posts: 470 ✭✭ manu2009


    Why are they so eager to increase the block sizes? There's no need for it at the moment, or in the near future..?

    https://txhighway.com/

    My guess would be to prove that increasing the block size is a viable long term scaling solution so that if BCH gains more traction and starts to get closer to BTC's transaction volume it will be able to handle the increased load and still have fast/low fee transactions.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,062 ✭✭✭ Kenny Logins


    manu2009 wrote: »
    My guess would be to prove that increasing the block size is a viable long term scaling solution so that if BCH gains more traction and starts to get closer to BTC's transaction volume it will be able to handle the increased load and still have fast/low fee transactions.

    I guess I'm just very suspicious/cautious of all of the big names involved in BCH, they're such a shady bunch that I wouldn't trust any of them to tell me the correct time of day. There is nowhere near enough activity to justify such a large increase right now, so I suspect there is another reason for it. I don't know what though.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,026 ✭✭✭ grindle


    They are fairly set on keeping sub-cent fees. And having the capacity for smart contracts later on. Future-proofing is always better than running directly into a brick wall as BTC did.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 657 Shauny2010


    For those who are interested, get started with some free Bitcoin (I say Bitcoin as I'm one of those who believe that Bitcoin core fork is not Bitcoin :D)

    https://free.bitcoin.com/


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 657 Shauny2010


    Bitcoin Cash Hardfork in November. All Hodlers can expect to get Bitcoin SV (BSV) on a 1:1 bases.
    As usual the sum of the parts is more than the whole ;)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 657 Shauny2010


    Bitcoin Cash underwent a stress test today, it had a massive amount of transactions the magnitude never before seen on any network.
    It looks to have passed with flying colors!!!!


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,655 ✭✭✭ makeorbrake


    Shauny2010 wrote: »
    Bitcoin Cash Hardfork in November. All Hodlers can expect to get Bitcoin SV (BSV) on a 1:1 bases.
    As usual the sum of the parts is more than the whole ;)

    Isn't it going to be a contentious hard fork though? Could be damaging to the project in the long run...


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 657 Shauny2010


    Yes its contentious, but hardly damaging. This was always going to happen at some stage.
    The Stress test results were really surprising, not alone the huge amount of transactions, but also how quickly the mempool could handle them. It was a real eye opener for Bitcoin core


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,655 ✭✭✭ makeorbrake


    Shauny2010 wrote: »
    Yes its contentious, but hardly damaging. This was always going to happen at some stage

    Why not damaging? Wasn't the split between core and bch damaging? This Wright character seems to be very divisive. Jihan Wu calling him a 'false satoshi' - as part of this particular schism.
    Remember that Bitmain have massive holding in BCH (not just in hash rate). Things getting polarised between a Bitcoin ABC dev team backed by them and Wright/Ayre/Ver....where will it lead?

    You've seen what has happened in the past as regards developer groups going in different directions..
    Shauny2010 wrote:
    The Stress test results were really surprising, not alone the huge amount of transactions, but also how quickly the mempool could handle them.
    Can we expect any difference in performance in real world application? (just trying to understand the significance of the stress test results).


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,062 ✭✭✭ Kenny Logins


    Shauny2010 wrote: »
    Yes its contentious, but hardly damaging. This was always going to happen at some stage.
    The Stress test results were really surprising, not alone the huge amount of transactions, but also how quickly the mempool could handle them. It was a real eye opener for Bitcoin core
    How was it surprising?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 657 Shauny2010


    Expect no difference, it just proves that the increase in blocksize was the correct decision. As I said before it was the ability of the mempool to handle the amount of transactions which surprised everyone.
    Looks like they are delivering on the promises of it being a usable crypto


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 657 Shauny2010


    How was it surprising?
    When this was tried on other networks getting transactions to show up on the mempool was the biggest bottleneck.

    Its useless having a crypto that can process blocks really quickly if you can even get the transactions on the mempool for inclusion in the blocks.
    Litecoin and Bitcoin core spring to mind here as both having problems


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,062 ✭✭✭ Kenny Logins


    Shauny2010 wrote: »
    How was it surprising?
    When this was tried on other networks getting transactions to show up on the mempool was the biggest bottleneck.

    Its useless having a crypto that can process blocks really quickly if you can even get the transactions on the mempool for inclusion in the blocks.
    Litecoin and Bitcoin core spring to mind here as both having problems
    I don't know why that's surprising though. I think it's obvious that bigger blocks will clear a mempool faster, it's the long-term effects of this that are not tested.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 657 Shauny2010


    I don't know why that's surprising though. I think it's obvious that bigger blocks will clear a mempool faster, it's the long-term effects of this that are not tested.


    Clearing the mempool is only half the problem. The real issue for an everyday currency to be usable is to be able to get the transaction to even show up on the mempool. Under stress test conditions it was still instant for Bitcoin Cash



    Litecoin for example creates blocks every 2 minutes but under stress test conditions some transactions were failing to even show up on the mempool for 2-3 minutes at times. Imagine your at the till at your local deli paying for a sandwich and having to wait 3 minutes for the transaction to go through!! And While Bitcoin core can have transactions showing up on the mempool, under stress test conditions only high fee paying transactions get added to the new block. Hardly ideal either!!


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,062 ✭✭✭ Kenny Logins


    My point is that 24 hours doesn't tell us much. It did exactly what was expected (except managing to fill any blocks).


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,062 ✭✭✭ Kenny Logins


    Looks like about 200 Bitcoin ABC nodes couldn't keep up..?

    https://cash.coin.dance/nodes/all


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 657 Shauny2010


    My point is that 24 hours doesn't tell us much. It did exactly what was expected (except managing to fill any blocks).
    No one expected any blocks to be filled, if the blocks start getting filled then the adjustable blocksize will kick in and the blocksize would increase again
    It done much more than what was expected, it handled 10X more transactions than Bitcoin core ever did.

    Doubt we will ever see a stress test on Bitcoin core unless someone wants to stomp up a couple of hundred million in fees to pay for it
    Looks like about 200 Bitcoin ABC nodes couldn't keep up..?

    https://cash.coin.dance/nodes/all


    Not surprising , I could run a node from a remote cabin in the mountains, but without proper backbone internet connection it would get left behind too.
    This applies to all cryptos and also bank payment systems


Advertisement