Consensus 2018

It's going to dump leading into Consensus. Then it's going to dump even harder once people realize there won't be a magical 70%+ Consensus pump/recovery. $6000 (at MOST) by end of next week.

Good call.

>someday

better than staying poor today

BTC will tank/plateau. ETH will pump hard. So will another certain token...

hyperledger.org/event/consensus-2018

Why don't they get their own name? It doesn't matter if they name it "Roger's Kool Coin" or even something like "Bitcash" it's just incommensurable dumb to insist on using the name that's already in use by the main player in the field. It's like if you start a tech company and insist on calling yourself Microsoft. No amount of "No, I'm Microsoft" will cut it. Can it be a better coin than Bitcoin and flippen Bitcoin? Sure, why not. But it can't be a better Bitcoin than Bitcoin, because it's not Bitcoin. If it wants to be taken seriously, it needs to get its own name.

Bitcoin is an open source project and Cash has more claim to the name than Segwit anyway.

links of chains, perhaps?

its not going to, get over it

Wall street is getting into ONLY Bitcoin. What do you think will happen to bch shit coin then?

>Why don't they get their own name?
The problem with zcash/zclassic was shit branding. "Bitcoin Private" solves that. It's a simple idea but simple ideas can be good ideas.
In the case of bcash, they assumed because "bitcoin cash" is an awkward thing to say, people would start calling it "bitcoin". A stupid assumption from a stupid team.

it isn't called Bitcoin segwit you idiot

>Wall street
>people who deal with money constantly are going to want a currency that has literally no ability to deal with throughput demand
>waiting hours to days and paying $60 to move money is somehow advantageous for Wall street

Maybe, but anything that calls itself Bitcoin X will never surpass Bitcoin, because it will always seem like a subset/subclass of Bitcoin, and thus lower in the hierarchy. In other words, it's a cucked name.

one of my biggest bags

v bullish

Zcash and zclassic are dumb names. Bitcoin Private is just trying to latch itself on and steal value by using the name Bitcoin. Just like every other fork.

Who's this stinker

I have just recently jumped in when I saw they are big sponsors at Consensus, CEO speaking at the mainstage and releasing a finished product there.
also nice partnerships announced and to be announced in this month.

It just is really strange that I never see any talk about this project. with 70mil market cap there is very good chance for good gains after they get more visibility thanks to Consensus.

exciting times ahead.

more like cleveland steamer amirite

Attached: pepeshart.jpg (492x493, 50K)

How is it stealing value? Every Bitcoin holder gets free btcp, and unlike some people the btcp devs actually recognise the hard work that has gone into creating bitcoin.

Like you say, Bcash is less tedious to say than Bitcoin Cash, but it does look a bit dumb to see written out. It could call itself something like Bitcash or ideally something more original (like Monero did when it changed its name from Bitmonero).

When you're a get rich quick scam like Bitcoin Private and want to be lazy with marketing, sure you can use Bitcoin in the name to ride its coattails, but when you claim and seem to be serious about it and make it a multibillion dollar business, then for fuck's sake get your own name.

Henri Pihkala, CEO of Streamr

But the name is the whole point of btcp. Zclassic was a great coin with garbage marketing. Now you have a great coin with great marketing. It's win win.

Good investors don't get emotionally involved. You are emotionally involved to the point of delusion. Guess what? I go were the money is. Not where the memeotions are

Sweetie, Bitcoin is store of value and will replace digital gold.

Digitized fiat will be king everywhere else in time. 99% of coins do not need to exist.

You might be projecting, because I really don't care much, right now I have 0 BTC and 0 BCH. What I'm bothered by is idiocy.

>store of value
Falling for that meme is going to get rekt, friendo. Store of value is a secondary function not a primary.

How exactly does this point to Link? Help a brainlet out.

Thinking of getting some Fusion and Hydrogen for Consensus. Any thoughts?

>Is this good for us or just a networking circle jerk for existing blockchains and coins?

it's good for iexec

Attached: 123456789.jpg (1455x850, 320K)

Hydrogen has been shilled for a few days, so make sure to check if it's still at a reasonable price before jumping in if you don't want to be left holding Jow Forums's bags. Don't know about Fusion.

It's doubled in the last week but is still fairly low and only listed on shit exchanges

Store of value is defacto it's primary function. Lightning takes time to expand and then it can do payments, too.

It bums me out that biz doesn't give a shit about lightning. Imo it's going to eat everyone's dinner.

>falling for the LN meme

phams...

I've yet to actually see anyone address the claim that lightning effectively centralizes Bitcoin.

Where have you looked?

I go off its whitepaper.

> Eventually, with optimizations, the network will look alot like the correspondent banking network

lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf

is anyone from biz gonna be there? i live in nyc itll be dope to hang out with you guys

Right. Well if you're having trouble understanding the white paper maybe you should try one of the thousands of videos, articles and forum posts that discuss it for the lay reader. Just a thought.

You fell for the memes my fren. Btc doesn't cost $60 to move nor does it take days.

You don't want to hang out with anyone from here.

>written in plain English
>y-you j-ust don't understand

okay

Hi newfriend. You don't even need to look far back to see what I'm talking about.

I haven't gone out to research it because I'm not ideologically or financially invested in the state of Bitcoin centralization. But is it not the case that open channels in the network can only transfer sums smaller than those locked into the channel? And would this not lead to the use of centralized (large) pools which could open (and keep open) high throughput channels?

You said you don't understand. In fact, you said you've never even seen anyone address the issue!
>I've yet to actually see anyone address the claim that lightning effectively centralizes Bitcoin.
Which is incredible.
Unless you don't know what "address" means?

>I haven't gone out to research it
If you don't care, then don't waste my time :)

>>I've yet to actually see anyone address the claim that lightning effectively centralizes Bitcoin.
I never said that. You were asking user where he looked, I was just explaining I formed my opinion from the horses mouth. LN is literally a banking solution to keep banks relevant despite disruptive tech.

Fact is projection now? Good to know.

I doubt you are qualified to understand the paper or its implications, it's actually pretty technical.
People who aren't drowning in their own hubris go out and read articles and discussions to help them understand, but you do you.

This is literally one of my investment guidelines

Never buy anything called Xcoin, other than for a pump n dump

The implications of how the network, works is laid out. Do tell though, since you're the expert on this whitepaper where I'm wrong.

>I pretend to read whitepapers
>I get into arguments about things I don't understand
>I demand anons do my research for me
yeah that's a hard pass from me

So that's a no, you disingenuous piece of shit.

it's good that we're correcting a bit before consensus, the bullrun and hype will continue in a few days

100% chinks niggers pajeets and jews with a smaidge of euro scammers. absolute shitcoin fest. If a company is showing or some jackass talks tech there their coin is a shitcoin. Its a marker for what not to buy, if its at consensus its a fucking cold stinking pile of shit

Nothing about this will help out your little purple pos token

What's disingenuous? You're a lazy cunt, it's totally reasonable to not spoonfeed you.

Attached: KEK.jpg (250x198, 5K)

You can't refute my argument or even what is written in the whitepaper. Your only excuse is "uhh its too complicated lol" and maybe for you it is.

You saw the word "bank" and got scared.
That's not an argument, so it can't be refuted. There. Happy?

Its intended function is that of a banking network. That is the end goal of this 2nd layer "solution". Why in the fuck would crypto need a banking solution? Hmm, hard one maybe Lightning is designed for banks?

Don't say you weren't warned about RLC

Attached: 1526096716663.jpg (739x648, 69K)

>Why in the fuck would crypto need a banking solution?
I can't even parse how retarded this sentence is.
What point do you think you're making here?

That crypto doesnt need banksters.

Great point very deep

My stack isn’t big enough

You are forgetting Bitcoin Omega Ruby and Bitcoin Alpha Sapphire

Attached: cuckface1.png (251x283, 186K)