Bitcoins - fad or trend?

User avatar
Bucketeer
Bearish Supporter
Posts: 1990
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014
Location: Warily watching the herd.

Re: Bitcoins - fad or trend?

Postby Bucketeer » Sat Nov 11, 2017

Bitcoin Cash website.
https://www.bitcoincash.org/
Gentlemen prefer Engelhard.

User avatar
SilverDoge
Constitutional Supporter
Posts: 3123
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014
Location: Italy

Re: Bitcoins - fad or trend?

Postby SilverDoge » Sat Nov 11, 2017

Bucketeer wrote:Andreas Antonopoulos is a member of the CME oversight committee. I hope he hasn't sold his soul to the devil, and I hope his role is more than being a lap-dog. Time will tell.


Andreas is asked to endorse a dozen ICO's every week and he never has. I highly doubt he would sell his soul out to the CME when he won't even put his name as an adviser to a single ICO. He has already spoken with the Canadian parliament before too, and has never "sold out" as far as I can tell. Doubt he would start now.
Image

User avatar
SilverDoge
Constitutional Supporter
Posts: 3123
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014
Location: Italy

Re: Bitcoins - fad or trend?

Postby SilverDoge » Sat Nov 11, 2017

Bucketeer wrote:I dunno John. It seems to me that everything that BTC does, BCH does better. The Bitcoin infrastructure supports BCH. BCH has leadership and direction, BTC is like a rudderless sailboat.

I just see a scenario when BTC looses users who migrate to BCH. BTC goes down in price, while BCH gains. I'm giving some serious thought to trading 50% of my BTC for BCH.

This situation troubles my bearish soul.


Here is my personal feeling on this. I feel like BCH simply hit the "easy button" and said we want to implement our own solution, without getting consensus, yet all the while standing on the backs of Satoshi and the bitcoin developers, and wanting to maintain the bitcoin brand. What is the governance model of BCH? Whatever Roger Ver says? This leadership is also a colossal weakness with a decentralized, peer to peer currency. It is another reason I like the governance structures of PIVX & DASH with MasterNode voting as a means of consensus.

I understand why they did what they did, but I don't like the execution. They are by definition an alt-coin, yet they are trying to brand themselves as bitcoin and I'm not buying what they're selling. Now that doesn't mean it won't be successful, especially while bitcoin is still in this scaling debacle. But lightning network (LN) isn't that far off. I want to see what SegWit + LN can do for our scaling and transaction problems before selling out like BCH. This is why I have more respect for LTC than BCH. Litecoin said we are the silver to bitcoin's gold. They owned it and developed their own coin after cloning bitcoin core's code. BCH is like shaving off 5% of a gold coin and then calling itself the "real gold" with value and potential.

BCH said the solution is bigger blocks. That will surely centralize the distribution of the network. It takes 8 times as much hard drive space and computing power to run a node. And, many of these servers won't be "home hosted" but hosted on AWS (Amazon Web Services). That makes it much more vulnerable to a single company or a government that tells that company to shut it down. So, in the short term BCH might seem like a good solution, but when one thinks it through, perhaps not.

Again, this doesn't mean it won't outperform bitcoin in the next 6-12 months. But I'm not thinking that short - I'm thinking 10 years. Will BCH overtake bitcoin in 10 years? I put the likelihood at 7%.
Image

User avatar
SilverDoge
Constitutional Supporter
Posts: 3123
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014
Location: Italy

Re: Bitcoins - fad or trend?

Postby SilverDoge » Sat Nov 11, 2017

SilverDoge wrote: Will BCH overtake bitcoin in 10 years? I put the likelihood at 7%.


With that being said, I do own the same amount of BCH that I own of BTC currently, just in case.
Image

User avatar
Long John
Turtle Supporter
Posts: 3052
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2016
Location: Northeast

Re: Bitcoins - fad or trend?

Postby Long John » Sat Nov 11, 2017

I have no objection to Bitcoin Cash co-existing peacefully with Bitcoin. Godspeed and good luck. But if the aim is to replace the original Bitcoin (and I have seen postings that they hope to drop the "Cash" from the name and be just "Bitcoin" in time) then I can't really bring myself to root for that and spend my BTC buying up BCH. No problem if former HODLers want to do that, they're big boys and must do what feels right even if others deem it unwise. It's basically what I've been doing since I entered this arena. :lol: Just can't spend my BTC on BCH and sure as hell not paying cash for it. Every BCH that exists was FREE three month ago.

In fact, if there develops a serious fight for supremacy between the two, I could see serious damage done to both sides and I probably wouldn't stay invested long enough to see who wins. (It would be BTC, in my opinion. It's just too huge to be toppled, even by a fork that processes transactions faster by virtue of bigger blocks and less traffic, but BTC could be badly scarred in the fight.)

User avatar
Bucketeer
Bearish Supporter
Posts: 1990
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014
Location: Warily watching the herd.

Re: Bitcoins - fad or trend?

Postby Bucketeer » Sat Nov 11, 2017

I see price parity coming with BTC/BCH, with perhaps a small premium to BCH.

I think that BTC will decrease in value while BCH rises in value until relative parity is established. We're really close to the action, and understand the politics and the in-fighting. If somebody new expressed an interest in Bitcoin, you could explain the entire history (and only confuse them in the process).

If you told them that both coins are equal, with the same limited supply, but BCH was "better, faster, cheaper", I think most people would go with BCH.

Love him or hate him, Roger Ver has done a lot for Bitcoin over the years. I can think of many people I would rather have in a leadership position of BCH, but time will tell. The claim to which coin deserves to be called Bitcoin should be based upon market cap, the number of wallets in existence, and the total number of transactions. Roger deserves credit for realizing Bitcoin has transmissibility problems, and attempting to fix those problems so that Bitcoin can scale.

BCH is closer to Nakamoto's vision of a digital currency than what BTC has evolved into.

The Core developers have a done a wonderful (and thankless) job with BTC. I view them as a small group of monks that worship a deity named Nakamoto, who may or may not exist. They are reluctant to change the Bitcoin code because they view it as a sacred document.

In the end, the market will decide which coin is Bitcoin, not Roger Ver.

Disclosure - I bought 5 BCH and 100 SALT tokens this morning. I still love Bitcoin, but I'm leveraging my investment.
Gentlemen prefer Engelhard.

User avatar
SilverDoge
Constitutional Supporter
Posts: 3123
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014
Location: Italy

Re: Bitcoins - fad or trend?

Postby SilverDoge » Sat Nov 11, 2017

Bucketeer wrote:I see price parity coming with BTC/BCH, with perhaps a small premium to BCH.

I think that BTC will decrease in value while BCH rises in value until relative parity is established. We're really close to the action, and understand the politics and the in-fighting. If somebody new expressed an interest in Bitcoin, you could explain the entire history (and only confuse them in the process).

If you told them that both coins are equal, with the same limited supply, but BCH was "better, faster, cheaper", I think most people would go with BCH.

Love him or hate him, Roger Ver has done a lot for Bitcoin over the years. I can think of many people I would rather have in a leadership position of BCH, but time will tell. The claim to which coin deserves to be called Bitcoin should be based upon market cap, the number of wallets in existence, and the total number of transactions. Roger deserves credit for realizing Bitcoin has transmissibility problems, and attempting to fix those problems so that Bitcoin can scale.

BCH is closer to Nakamoto's vision of a digital currency than what BTC has evolved into.

The Core developers have a done a wonderful (and thankless) job with BTC. I view them as a small group of monks that worship a deity named Nakamoto, who may or may not exist. They are reluctant to change the Bitcoin code because they view it as a sacred document.

In the end, the market will decide which coin is Bitcoin, not Roger Ver.

Disclosure - I bought 5 BCH and 100 SALT tokens this morning. I still love Bitcoin, but I'm leveraging my investment.


Very interesting. I like the contrary opinion. I view the developers differently though. While reluctant to change (which is good), there have been many BIPs implemented along the way. I own equal amounts of BTC and BCH and will simply hold through it.
Image

User avatar
Bucketeer
Bearish Supporter
Posts: 1990
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014
Location: Warily watching the herd.

Re: Bitcoins - fad or trend?

Postby Bucketeer » Sat Nov 11, 2017

I'm still a hodler. Like you, I also had equal amounts of BTC/BCH.

I'm now at 1 BCT to 1.5 BCH.

TexMex really got me thinking about the BTC/BCH controversy, when he posted that he had switched some BTC in BCH. I had been thinking about the situation abstractly, but spent most of last night thinking it thru. If BCH falls to zero, I'm still so far ahead of the game that it really doesn't matter.

I consider myself truly blessed for even getting into Bitcoin and Ethereum.

Back on August 1st, my Bitcoins were in a Jaxx wallet. I have since bought a KeepKey,and moved the Bitcoins there. I've been wondering just how I was going to separate the 2 coins, since BCH has become active in the marketplace.

I bought a little AcePC for staking Qtum last week, and for a few tasks that my ChromeBox can't handle. I downloaded the Jaxx wallet last night, and restored it with the pass-phrase. After the wallet was restored, I picked out some wallets (BTC, ETH, QTUM, SALT, and BCH.

After the wallets were created, I initialized all of them. To my great surprise, The BCH wallet contained my BCH. I didn't have to do a thing. The value was just over 5 figures, so it was a really nice surprise.

I have an older PC that I used during the Ethereum crowd-sale. I installed the Ether in the temporary wallet in Geth 0.73. I had an old computer and a slow internet connection, and I was only able to download the block chain 1 time. It took almost 5 days. I transferred the Ether, but was never able to access it after that because Geth 0.73 was unable to update the block chain.

A lot of people had problems with 0.73, and the next couple of updates didn't work for me either. I had the coins in the wallet, but no way to move them out.

One day, I tried Geth and while it didn't update the block chain, it did allow me to transfer Ether to the Jaxx wallet. Because the block chain wasn't up to date, I didn't know how many Ether were actually there. I transferred as much as I was comfortable with, and put the project aside.

I estimate that I have 40-50 Ether left on this computer. My next task is going to be to get the wallet.dat files, and download the current version of Geth to the new computer. My internet connection is much faster than I had before, so I'm hopefully all is not lost.

Thanks for letting me ramble.
Gentlemen prefer Engelhard.

User avatar
Bucketeer
Bearish Supporter
Posts: 1990
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014
Location: Warily watching the herd.

Re: Bitcoins - fad or trend?

Postby Bucketeer » Sat Nov 11, 2017

BTG is now $375, up 109%.
Gentlemen prefer Engelhard.

User avatar
SilverDoge
Constitutional Supporter
Posts: 3123
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014
Location: Italy

Re: Bitcoins - fad or trend?

Postby SilverDoge » Sat Nov 11, 2017

Bucketeer wrote:BTG is now $375, up 109%.


That's interesting. I think I had about 0.001 BTC on Bittrex during the BTG snapshot. I was actively trying to avoid BTG but I had some dust on the exchange. I don't know if/when Bittrex will support but it isn't that important to me.

Ironically B2X futures are still selling at HitBTC right now for $344. Which would you rather have, BTG or a B2X future?

My answer: neither.
Image

User avatar
Bucketeer
Bearish Supporter
Posts: 1990
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014
Location: Warily watching the herd.

Re: Bitcoins - fad or trend?

Postby Bucketeer » Sat Nov 11, 2017

I'd take BTG because I don't think it is harmful to the protocol or the protection against a 51% attack. As to if it becomes used and accepted, that's anybody's guess. I don't see it as a significant competitor to Bitcoin.
Gentlemen prefer Engelhard.

User avatar
Long John
Turtle Supporter
Posts: 3052
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2016
Location: Northeast

Re: Bitcoins - fad or trend?

Postby Long John » Sat Nov 11, 2017

Hmm, not liking the scenario of BTC falling and BCH rising until they're worth the same. That doesn't seem sustainable, and in the end one has to emerge as the dominant Bitcoin with the other falling (or falling back) to alt status or being absorbed. If that scenario develops, BTC will never see $10K and I wouldn't think the two combined would see $10K. The conflict would send a lot of money to the best alts, or to fiat. It's not a scenario I care for, but no denying BCH is gaining momentum and perhaps what I want doesn't matter. Others with almost unimaginable resources will decide the matter.

I'll observe for awhile longer before deciding a personal course of action. It won't be selling BTC for BCH, I'm pretty sure. If I become convinced BTC will never see the heights that have been predicted for so long, well, I can think of some things to spend the money on. But I'm not yet convinced.

User avatar
Southpaw
Gold Supporter
Posts: 279
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014
Location: Northern California

Re: Bitcoins - fad or trend?

Postby Southpaw » Sat Nov 11, 2017

https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions

Unconfirmed transactions climbing like crazy was curious if the miners cause this or someone putting through all these really small transactions. Just trying to wrap my head around it.
45-70 the only Government I really want

User avatar
Bucketeer
Bearish Supporter
Posts: 1990
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014
Location: Warily watching the herd.

Re: Bitcoins - fad or trend?

Postby Bucketeer » Sat Nov 11, 2017

Bucketeer wrote:I see price parity coming with BTC/BCH, with perhaps a small premium to BCH.


I think that BTC will decrease in value while BCH rises in value until relative parity is established. We're really close to the action, and understand the politics and the in-fighting. If somebody new expressed an interest in Bitcoin, you could explain the entire history (and only confuse them in the process).

If you told them that both coins are equal, with the same limited supply, but BCH was "better, faster, cheaper", I think most people would go with BCH.

Does that statement seem illogical or incorrect?

It seems plausible to me, since both coins accomplish the same thing, but one does it "better, faster, cheaper", and it is priced less less than its' slower, more expensive sibling.

Bitcoin has already far exceeded anybodies expectation for 2017. At the beginning of this year, a $3000 EOY estimate was laughable, but nobody is laughing now.

Many people in this topic back in January stated that $1000 Bitcoin was too expensive and unsustainable, and I'm probably one of them.
Last edited by Bucketeer on Sat Nov 11, 2017, edited 2 times in total.
Gentlemen prefer Engelhard.

User avatar
Silversaving
Posts: 632
Joined: Wed May 20, 2015
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: Bitcoins - fad or trend?

Postby Silversaving » Sat Nov 11, 2017

I've been in the bitcoin cash camp from the start...believe there are a few posts by me to that effect buried around here. BTC had something of a hostile takeover by a for profit company and their paid employees trying to bring in new code to force offchain settlements of btc. They wanted this because they could CHARGE for those and rake in a huge amounts of money. The reason bitcoin cash came about was some folks saw this and felt they needed to fork the code before it was irreversibly damaged by segwit code addition (something that CANNOT be removed once added). So what we ended up with was COREcoin (the paid, for profit entity now going by the name btc) and bitcoin cash (The PURE original bitcoin code with larger blocks to make it faster and cheaper). Now folks freaking out about them increasing the block size are either new to crypto or ingorant as btc has done this multiple times in the past as more people adopted the use of btc.

At any rate, whatever happens, bought my 40 bitcoin cash in the upper $100s when it first forked and will be holding through this whole mess.

User avatar
texmex66
Posts: 332
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2016

Re: Bitcoins - fad or trend?

Postby texmex66 » Sat Nov 11, 2017

Silversaving wrote:I've been in the bitcoin cash camp from the start...believe there are a few posts by me to that effect buried around here. BTC had something of a hostile takeover by a for profit company and their paid employees trying to bring in new code to force offchain settlements of btc. They wanted this because they could CHARGE for those and rake in a huge amounts of money. The reason bitcoin cash came about was some folks saw this and felt they needed to fork the code before it was irreversibly damaged by segwit code addition (something that CANNOT be removed once added). So what we ended up with was COREcoin (the paid, for profit entity now going by the name btc) and bitcoin cash (The PURE original bitcoin code with larger blocks to make it faster and cheaper). Now folks freaking out about them increasing the block size are either new to crypto or ingorant as btc has done this multiple times in the past as more people adopted the use of btc.

At any rate, whatever happens, bought my 40 bitcoin cash in the upper $100s when it first forked and will be holding through this whole mess.


Nice foresight on your part. :thumbup:

The way things are going we could hit parity by years end. :shock:

My loss in BTC is being neutralized by my gains in BCH at the moment. :pop:

User avatar
Bucketeer
Bearish Supporter
Posts: 1990
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014
Location: Warily watching the herd.

Re: Bitcoins - fad or trend?

Postby Bucketeer » Sat Nov 11, 2017

texmex66 wrote:
Silversaving wrote:I've been in the bitcoin cash camp from the start...believe there are a few posts by me to that effect buried around here. BTC had something of a hostile takeover by a for profit company and their paid employees trying to bring in new code to force offchain settlements of btc. They wanted this because they could CHARGE for those and rake in a huge amounts of money. The reason bitcoin cash came about was some folks saw this and felt they needed to fork the code before it was irreversibly damaged by segwit code addition (something that CANNOT be removed once added). So what we ended up with was COREcoin (the paid, for profit entity now going by the name btc) and bitcoin cash (The PURE original bitcoin code with larger blocks to make it faster and cheaper). Now folks freaking out about them increasing the block size are either new to crypto or ingorant as btc has done this multiple times in the past as more people adopted the use of btc.

At any rate, whatever happens, bought my 40 bitcoin cash in the upper $100s when it first forked and will be holding through this whole mess.


Nice foresight on your part. :thumbup:


The way things are going we could hit parity by years end. :shock:

My loss in BTC is being neutralized by my gains in BCH at the moment. :pop:


You guys nailed it. The current Bitcoin situation would never had occurred if Nakamoto was still involved in the project. It does not align with his vision for a digital currency, and I think he would have changed the code several years ago.

I said earlier that I believed that BTC and BCH would reach "relative price" parity, but that BCH would be slightly higher priced. I also said that BCH is "better, faster, and cheaper", but that will probably change.

A good analogy would be to compare regular mail and express mail. BCH is like express mail. It is better, faster, but it is not cheaper.

The same thing applies to Bitcoin transmission fees. You can go fast or slow, depending on what you are willing to pay.

With the release of BCH, the supply of Bitcoin has effectively doubled. I still believe that BTC will decline and BCH will increase until "relative parity" is established.

BCC.............$5905
BCH.............$1813
BTG..............$450
-------------------------
..................$8168

It's happening right before our eyes!
Last edited by Bucketeer on Sun Nov 12, 2017, edited 1 time in total.
Gentlemen prefer Engelhard.

User avatar
Fabio
Posts: 1203
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011
Location: Vancouver/Seattle
Contact:

Re: Bitcoins - fad or trend?

Postby Fabio » Sun Nov 12, 2017

Here's an interesting article, not sure if someone posted it already. According to this article from July 30, B2X was never going to happen, it was a distraction (or something along those lines), the plan was to make BCH the dominant coin.

https://pastebin.com/n0aGBMQr

I personally own as much BTC as BCH, which is 0.000.
Image

User avatar
Long John
Turtle Supporter
Posts: 3052
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2016
Location: Northeast

Re: Bitcoins - fad or trend?

Postby Long John » Sun Nov 12, 2017

Well, that was ugly, for those still holding BTC. Here's a lesson in going with your gut and not being overly influenced by what others are saying or doing. If I were to sell right now, I would have forfeited about $11K extra profit because I didn't stick to my guns a week ago. As posted here at the time, I sold off at $7479, lost my nerve and bought it back at $7385. It looked good for awhile, getting up to $7800 or so, not so good today. Newcomers who bought BTC in the $7000s are hurting a lot worse. But people who have been in for awhile should be OK, even after this plummet. Sure wish Coinbase would release the Bitcoin Gold it's sitting on. Not that I think much of BTG's future, but people with a BTC balance in Coinbase at the time of that fork are entitled to that coin.

User avatar
Long John
Turtle Supporter
Posts: 3052
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2016
Location: Northeast

Re: Bitcoins - fad or trend?

Postby Long John » Sun Nov 12, 2017

Fabio wrote:Here's an interesting article, not sure if someone posted it already. According to this article from July 30, B2X was never going to happen, it was a distraction (or something along those lines), the plan was to make BCH the dominant coin.

Yeah, I've seen conspiracy theories in that vein, that some folks are raking in the dollars and the Bitcoin by manipulating these events to unfold just as they have done. Sounds like sour grapes to me, but who knows. What goes on with the super-rich in this market is almost beyond my comprehension. Almost.


Return to “Bitcoin”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests