BSV also has the same finite supply of 21,000,000. The main difference is that BSV scales so that when you decide you want to transfer your money you will actually be able to do so, and it won't disappear because of fees. Also, how do you expect miners to sustain the network if everyone is supposed to use layer 2 solutions like lightning?
Soon
Ryder Thomas
Easton Morales
BCH performs way better than BSV. BSV soon to be 1/3 BCH's price. Perhaps has something to do with fundamentals.
Gavin Sanchez
>Perhaps has something to do with fundamentals
looks to me more related to hashrate
Brody Martin
>Also, how do you expect miners to sustain the network if everyone is supposed to use layer 2 solutions like lightning?
that's pretty simple lightning at scale will require 100mb blocks just to maintain channels.
Christopher Clark
Yes
Logan Diaz
>BTC
Here is a pile of shit. It is worth something because my feelings say so.
Elijah Ortiz
>BCH performs way better than BSV
In what metric? BSV is faster and can handle much larger blocks. It is the only chain that can facilitate the metanet. Bitcoin SV is the clear choice for miners and allows businesses to build applications and websites on it reliably.
Bentley Martin
>metanet
that's a joke just leave it alone!
Gabriel Jones
The current system where every user is a network node is not the intended configuration for large scale. That would be like every Usenet user runs their own NNTP server. The design supports letting users just be users. The more burden it is to run a node, the fewer nodes there will be. Those few nodes will be big server farms. The rest will be client nodes that only do transactions and don't generate.
SN 2010
Easton Cook
> lightning
that's a joke just leave it alone!
> FTFY