Token Daily

Buy BTC. Like, today

1

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you’re referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX. Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called “Linux”, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called “Linux” distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

1

Vartemis Crypto Nerd | CC: 24 QC Yesterday

From the thumbnail I thought it was a man resting his chin on his fist with the back of his hand facing the camera.

1

HoboHaxor Yesterday

FeeFee is talking about a controlled coin like Ripple. The IMF would NEVER adopt an unregulated coin. Why would they??? They are a regulatory entity.

2

galt76v3 Yesterday

Yeah... well, if she's so "understanding" about crypto then why give the Maldives such a hard time about establishing their own sovereign crypto??

My parents being both immigrants from two different countries gave me an interest in history/politics outside of the U.S. After many years I came to the conclusion that my father is right: Rich countries (U.S., U.K., France, Western Europe, etc.) and their financial tools (IMF, financial aid, refugee programs, etc.) are simply a means of control.

"You take our money, you do what we want."

If you even dare refuse their money, they shut you out of the "global financial system." Why do you think North Korea is hell bent on Monero?? I don't support the regime in the least. But I respect the fact that they've come to realize that crypto is the way --- at least for the government. My hope is that Iran comes to its senses and pursues Monero as a means to release their economy from the grip of people like the IMF and the U.S.

The unintended consequence of this will be that their respective peoples will also benefit from this shift to Monero by freeing them from their own regime's grip on their financial lives.

This is one of the promises of Monero. Freeing the world from the financial control of the states that have built the modern fiat monetary system and letting them engage in commerce as they wish, without fear of sanctions and the such.

5

Romulus13 Altcoiner Yesterday

The problem might be that every government creates its own centralized cryptocurrency. Even bigger problem is if the ledger for that digital currency is not public and transparent. I would chuck this as very slightly bullish because it might make the concept of cryptocurrencies more appealing to the masses.

3

KingPonzi Redditor for 8 days Yesterday

You guys ready for more Tethers?

1

bluey89 Yesterday

While not specifically mentioning Monero, I think this article might be interesting for the community. Firstly Lagarde briefly touches on the privacy problem at one point in the speech:

a) Risks to financial integrity

Let’s return to the tradeoff between privacy and financial integrity. Could we find a middle ground?

Central banks might design digital currency so that users’ identities would be authenticated through customer due diligence procedures and transactions recorded. But identities would not be disclosed to third parties or governments unless required by law. So when I purchase my pizza and beer, the supermarket, its bank, and marketers would not know who I am. The state might not either, at least by default.

Anti-money laundering and terrorist financing controls would nevertheless run in the background. If a suspicion arose it would be possible to lift the veil of anonymity and investigate.

This setup would be good for users, bad for criminals, and better for the state, relative to cash. Of course, challenges remain. My goal, at this point, is to encourage exploration.

Secondly, an indepth note is available for reading here: https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/Staff-Discussion-Notes/Issues/2018/11/13/Casting-Light-on-Central-Bank-Digital-Currencies-46233

Thirdly, it's hard to imagine a speech like this coming out of the IMF just a couple of years, shows how far we've come.

5

maroule Yesterday

https://www.cryptolinenews.com/2018/11/lagarde-urges-banks-to-quickly-create-their-own-cryptocurrencies/

0

maroule Yesterday

>Cbdc (central bank digital currencies) IMF research showed that only central banks could develop systems that would be safe enough. Sweden’s central bank has run tests and the IMF has credited Canada, China and Uruguay as also moving ahead with plans to provide a digital currency.

1

kenta-_- Yesterday

That headline is misleading. She isnt encouraging that banks make their own cryptos. She is encouraging that they use digital assets. Whether that be one or many is up to interpretation. Seeing the IMFs obvious love affair with Ripple, I wont be surprised to see an official endorsement of XRP eventually.

1

nnawuihe Redditor for 20 days Yesterday

You mean central banks? Or private banks? I can see a place for the latter but I don’t see how state-controlled banks have any relevance once they no longer have exclusive control of currency. She’s arguing for them to insert themselves into a model that would work much better without them. We don’t need them to create tokens, their deflationary by nature so no place for never-ending printing to depress our real wages. Central bank interference would just slow down the process and make it less secure/private. What do you think?

Edit: meant this as a reply above. Now can’t figure out how to delete. Forgive me, I’m but a noob.

2

nnawuihe Redditor for 20 days Yesterday

She’s a true visionary and I like her. But she’s arguing that central banks should stay relevant based on the trust they can bring when they have already and continue to undermine that trust daily by propagating this spiralling debt bail in/out charade. I can’t see why we’ll need them in 5-10 years

2

WoodenDoorbell Redditor for 7 months Yesterday

I cannot see a world without banks. It won't be allowed to happen even if it could, Lagarde is basically telling us this. Like them or not, they provide stability to big corporations and security to the little ones. They may have less clout in 5-10 years but they will still be there.

10

mutantpop Yesterday

You might not see it the future is full of surprises. Prepare for different scenarios.

0

nnawuihe Redditor for 20 days Yesterday

You mean central banks? Or private banks? I can see a place for the latter but I don’t see how state-controlled banks have any relevance once they no longer have exclusive control of currency. She’s arguing for them to insert themselves into a model that would work much better without them. We don’t need them to create tokens, their deflationary by nature so no place for never-ending printing to depress our real wages. Central bank interference would just slow down the process and make it less secure/private. What do you think?

1

proficy Investor Yesterday

Central banks regulate the interest rates and monitor the state of the economy using those rates to cool down or heat up an economy, in an effort to keep it stable.

5

nnawuihe Redditor for 20 days Yesterday

Very true. But I don’t see their relevance to digital assets / crypto. Maybe I’m cynical but I see interest rate manipulation, printing money, quantitative easing etc. as spinning plates to keep a pyramid scheme going. After 2008 and the complete inability of banks to self-regulate since then, I think they’ve lost a lot of public trust. I don’t see them coming into crypto and magically starting to do a good job, and I don’t see why we need them. We’re doing fine without them and it’s getting better every day with more and more use cases and adoptions, without central bank involvement. They may make a bit of money issuing their own coins, but I don’t see how they could compete with the private sector, they’re already a decade late

1

TheBullishGuy Crypto God | CC: 45 QC | 5 months old Yesterday

Bullish?

0

D0mm0n Redditor for 10 months. Yesterday

Not at all

2

Cryptionary Crypto Nerd | 2 months old Yesterday

**['Bullish' definition](https://buyhodlsell.com/terminology/bullish/)**: When market sentiment is positive and price is increasing *Check out the [crypto terminology guide](https://buyhodlsell.com/terminology/) for more 🤖*

2

TheBullishGuy Crypto God | CC: 45 QC | 5 months old Yesterday

Username self-checks out

1

tijapa Yesterday

*checks prices* Nope.

1

ripple_king Yesterday

Ripple is even mentioned there but should have been XRP :)

5

BKCCI Redditor for 12 months Yesterday

The IMF sharing its perspective on digital currencies.

Background info:

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is an international organization headquartered in Washington, D.C., consisting of "189 countries working to foster global monetary cooperation, secure financial stability, facilitate international trade, promote high employment and sustainable economic growth, and reduce poverty around the world."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Monetary_Fund

My personal highlight from the article is the following part:

c) Risks to innovation

If digital currency became too popular, it might ironically stifle innovation. Where is your role if the central bank offers a full-service solution, from digital wallet, to token, to back-end settlement services?

What if, instead, central banks entered a partnership with the private sector — banks and other financial institutions—and said: you interface with the customer, you store their wealth, you offer interest, advice, loans. But when it comes time to transact, we take over.

This partnership could take various forms. Banks and other financial firms, including startups, could manage the digital currency. Much like banks which currently distribute cash.

Or, individuals could hold regular deposits with financial firms, but transactions would ultimately get settled in digital currency between firms. Similar to what happens today, but in a split second. All nearly for free. And anytime.

The advantage is clear. Your payment would be immediate, safe, cheap, and potentially semi-anonymous. As you wanted. And central banks would retain a sure footing in payments. In addition, they would offer a more level playing field for competition, and a platform for innovation. Meanwhile your bank, or fellow entrepreneurs, would have ensured a friendly user experience based on the latest technologies.

Putting it another way: the central bank focuses on its comparative advantage—back-end settlement—and financial institutions and start-ups are free to focus on what they do best—client interface and innovation. This is public-private partnership at its best.

They also provide a link to a full-text report called "Casting Light on Central Bank Digital Currency" at the top of the page of that article.

7

DeathThrasher Yesterday

Let me guess: There will be no decentralization, not open source, no public ledger, full of bugs and they can issue as much as they want out of thin air anytime.

1

Motor-boat Yesterday

From just a brief skim it seems like the author genuinely believes Bitcoin is managed by a private firm.

0

qazwsx1112 Yesterday

Interestingly, she is also the chairman of IMF

2

ABitcoinAllBot 1 day ago

Here is the link to the original comment thread. Or you can comment here to start a discussion. Author: qazwsx1112

1

larrysalibra - @larrysalibra Yesterday

> This currency could satisfy public policy goals, such as (i) financial inclusion, and (ii) security and consumer protection; and to provide what the private sector cannot: (iii) privacy in payments.

If financial inclusion and privacy in payments were actual public policy goals, cryptocurrencies would be a lot less attractive.

In reality, the real public policy goals are:

1) Financial exclusion: using denial of access to the state run financial system as a political, law enforcement, social control and tax collection tool.

3) "Know your customer" and "anti-money laundering" (AML/KYC) rules that remove privacy in payments to make it easier to use the state run financial system as described in 1). These regulations in practice exclude the the poorer people in society - the people Lagarde like means when she says "financial inclusion" - that can't meet requirements like "proof of address" and can't meet the minimal balance / month fee requirements that have come about from these AML/KYC regs.

netcan - @netcan Yesterday

Because of bitcoin, cryptocurrency has a strong association with "free money," which is basically a dissent theory of macroeconomics that doesn't want central banks to have control. This was written by a central banker, so obviously there's a belligerence here...

In any case... Idk what I think about free money. Macroeconomics is hard.

OTOH, I think cryptocurrencies have other disruptive potential even if we want to keep our current macroeconomics, central bank control over interest rates.

It's the kind of technology that turns a £100bn industry into a £1bn one. There are several clunky inefficient financial services sub-industries that could potentiall be digitised by good implementation of blockchain tech.

The problem is too-big-to-fail. Besides actual central banking, does Christine Lagarde see her job as protector of the financial services industry? If so, she's going to build bureaucracy that maintains the status quo.

hanniabu - @hanniabu Yesterday

> cryptocurrencies seek to anchor trust in technology. So long as they are transparent.....Still, I am not entirely convinced. Proper regulation of these entities will remain a pillar of trust.

I don't think they understand that the purpose of cryptocurrencies is to remove the need for trust. Trust in the math, not the banker. AKA the economy should be built off the monetary system rather than the monetary system being built off the economy.

chroem- - @chroem- 1 day ago

If cryptocurrency is like bittorrent for finance, then this proposal is like downloading DRM-encumbered music from a walled garden marketplace. I think I'll pass.

hkt - @hkt Yesterday

I feel like one day, central banks are going to be attacked by private banks and the means of attack will be cryptocurrency. The aim will be to get rid of central bank deposits and seize control of the payments system - once the central bank deposits are gone and we're cashless, this will become easy. They could even base it offshore to avoid consumer protections. If we're lucky when this happens, it will be a test of the remaining power of nation states. If we're unlucky, they'll roll over as the most basic means of exchange is privatized.

divan - @divan Yesterday

This is suprisingly good and even refreshing speech after reading tons of very opinionated pro- and contra-crypto articles.

Financial system design still have this chicken or the egg problem – we need to design fintech systems aligned with offline social interaction patterns as much as possible, but their (current) design changes our social interaction patterns in return as well.

It's still fascinating to see how the world reimagines and reconsiders the nature of money. And not only in cryptopunks community, but in such a huge powerhouses as IMF as well.

RanInt1111 - @RanInt1111 Yesterday

There's not even a way to have a frank and open discussion about this topic because censorship is running rampant in the western world after communists, liberals, socialists, and other savages introduced it to self-retrain and to subjugate the civilized world for the parasites to take over.

It's odd realizing that the future dystopian worlds depicted in things like the Maze Runner (as odd as that may seem if you don't know the full story) are actually going to be quite accurate as the gullible masses self-censor and self-harm themselves into self-subjugation. I keep trying to explain the very clear plans the elite have, but the rabble mobs are quite consistent in their rejection of "heresy".

Show all comments on Hackernews

2

1 3

3 4

BewareTheChainSplit 1 day ago

Congratulations, everybody. Coinbase is now going to halt all BCH trading indefinitely until the attack is over. The situation is turning out to be as bad as I predicted.

1

Chris_Pacia OpenBazaar 1 day ago

Mods should delete posts that falsely put up quotes of companies that they did not say. This is incredibly dishonest behavior.

5

Windowly 1 day ago

It's not a false quote. Read the article.

0

Windowly 1 day ago

Oops. Chris really has Craig Wright Derangement Syndrome. Here is a link to the part of the article with the quote. https://imgur.com/Qgbv8hR

0

Chris_Pacia OpenBazaar 1 day ago

You modified the quote to make it say something they didn't say and to make it appear as if they plan on following any chain regardless of consensus rules which they did not say. This is the type of very dishonest tactics you BSV people are engaged in. It's not surprising since you support the ultimate unethical behavior of attacking users and taking away their choice.

1

Windowly 1 day ago

There is nothing unethical with the majority chain attacking the minority chain to protect the ecosystem and userbase of the majority chain. ABC should do if it they were the winners of the hashwar and NChain should do it if they are the winners. This is vintage white paper stuff. Surprised it is shocking to you.

0

Chris_Pacia OpenBazaar 1 day ago

The white paper specifically calls it an attack and says the system fails if it happens. You're frankly a totalitarian asshole who should just leave the community. Nobody wants you here.

1

pafkatabg Yesterday

Miners who work to extend the chain even with new rules , is not an attack. It's an upgrade. ABC is trying to do the same - work to extend the chain with their new ruleset. It's an attack if the goal is to kill the chain and there's nothing left working after the attack. The situation now is different.. SV does not want to kill BCH. SV miners will work on BCH chain and will extend it with their updated ruleset with enough hashpower. This is hash vote. If they lose , they will mine the ABC ruleset as they have already promised. SV are dedicated to work on the BCH chain, no matter which ruleset wins. This isn't an attack. It would be an attack if BTC miners joined hashpower and just started mining empty blocks on BCH for several weeks until the chain goes down to $0, and it no longer exists. This is the type of attack described in the whitepaper... The current drama is very different.

1

Chris_Pacia OpenBazaar Yesterday

> This is hash vote. If they lose , they will mine the ABC ruleset as they have already promised. SV are dedicated to work on the BCH chain, no matter which ruleset wins. This isn't an attack. I wish that's all they were doing. But they clearly are not. They are threatening the exact attack you describe. Mine empty blocks until the ABC side goes to zero and then "pitch" BSV as the "the new BCH".

1

Windowly 1 day ago

Sounding a little emotionally fragile, all I can say. . 😂 😂

1

Chris_Pacia OpenBazaar 1 day ago

Seriously. Every one of your posts gets negative votes here. Nobody wants you here. Nobody likes you. Cut your losses and leave. Find something else to do with your life.

1

Windowly 1 day ago

Feeling salty? I would too if I were you and was looking at the Coin. Dance hash numbers.

2

ABitcoinAllBot 1 day ago

Here is the link to the original comment thread. Or you can comment here to start a discussion. Author: Windowly

1

4 3

2

24 2

coinstash Crypto God | BTC: 31 QC | CC: 16 QC Yesterday

Too little, too late.

0

tommad2000 Yesterday

At first light, on the fifth day. At dawn, look to the East.

2

Anen-o-me Yesterday

Thank God.

1

JoshHomeroGarza Yesterday

Fight to the death BCHABS and BCHSV. It's hilarious.

0

AdministrativeTrain Yesterday

Redditor for four years with one karma. Pathetic little prick.

2

JoshHomeroGarza Yesterday

🍿

0

ultimatehub24 Redditor for less than 2 weeks Yesterday

Jihan and Roger should destroy faketoshi and other rich toolboxes, who dont care about proper protocol development.

1

AdministrativeTrain Yesterday

They should have fucking done this days ago. I came very close to selling and I bet many others actually have sold.

7

BitcoinIsTehFuture Yesterday

Perhaps it was part of their strategy not to show their hand, unlike nChain which has been showing their hand the entire time (it's possible nChain/Coingeek has even more hashrate up their sleeves too)

5

caveden Yesterday

Let's not forget that, assuming a fork actually happens, more powerful than Bitmain's hashpower will be Bitmain's stash of coins if they decide to trade accordingly.

12

karmacapacitor Yesterday

I disgree with the notion that feduciary responsibility was to prevent using hash power to influence the outcome of the fork. It can easily be argued that this is a kind of stewardship for long term thinking. But I do not think the same can be said for reckless gambling of assets. Putting all eggs in one basket is a terrible move from a risk perspective.

1

saddit42 Yesterday

They have some balls to do that now.. ..

2

andareas Redditor for 11 days. Yesterday

90k x 13.5Th isn't going to be nearly enough.

0

BeastMiners Yesterday

Either way bcash is fucked. Decentralised my arse.

0

Phucknhell Yesterday

oh ye of little faith......

1

SeppDepp2 Yesterday

Only when really splitted ...

1

etherbid Yesterday

"Cavalry"

Haha. The white knight is coming to save ABC's sorry ass.

It must feel pathetic for a man having to come in and save you.

I cannot imagine the mixed emotions they feel

0

Phucknhell Yesterday

it's quite hilarious how much people are emotionally invested in this hashfight... poor etherbid

2

PapaDock820 Redditor for 5 months. Yesterday

Finally, something remotely interesting in crypto, unlike faux partnership announcements, or crypto projects being invited to speak at conventions.

0

aeroFurious Yesterday

You guys are so lucky, you can pick between 1 big miner on both sides. Either you get to be ChinaCoin or you get to be FaketoshiCoin.

Both future outlook is great! Here comes true p2p cash. Thanks Roger

4

N0T_SURE Yesterday

How's that store of value working for you?

2

aeroFurious 8 hs ago

I'm happy with Bitcoin considering we had a successful UASF to kick out trash that was accepted here on both sides. Thanks for asking.

1

N0T_SURE 8 hs ago

i'm glad

1

impossible_try Yesterday

Somehow POS, Proof of Stake starts looking attractive all again. That's my conclusion from the "hash war". Doing only coins featuring No Miners in the future.

3

aeroFurious Yesterday

PoW isn't the problem, the problem is that there generally can't be two coins co-existing with the same algo. The second minor coin will suffer heavily as any malicious actor can just accumulate miners to attack as there is no sufficient hash power from good actors as these will mine the major (more stable/more liquid) chain. Miners aren't retarded. BCH went round this problem with implementing the DEA and so on, the chain would be dead from the first minute without it. It seems like this didn't fix the problem, but simply delayed it. The BCH chain isn't viable with an avg of 5% hashpower compared to BTC. It's simply insecure in many ways.

3

KosinusBCH Yesterday

Bitmain is just making it part of their pool, when the hash war is done and over with they will go back to mining whatever is most profitable, and pool distribution will once again be like it was before Craig borrowed Calvin's money. Calvin said he will follow ABC if they win, so there's no logic behind keeping up an attack at zero profit for weeks.

6

uglymelt Yesterday

Somehow misleading, the article shows a graph about bitcoin hashrate distribution.

0

5heikki Yesterday

If they support the current leading implementation, they will mine with SV. SV is right now by far the most popular BCH implementation, controlling like 80% of the hash..

0

seanthenry Yesterday

Only 8% of nodes are SV. 98% of reporting vendors are prepared/supporting ABC. 44% of reporting vendors are prepared/supporting SV. [https://cash.coin.dance/](https://cash.coin.dance/)

0

5heikki Yesterday

Node count doesn't mean anything. I could buy 1k rPis and wow suddenly SV had the most nodes..

2

seanthenry Yesterday

You are right on the point that more could just be added. My point was/is that 10x more nodes are set up exclusively for ABC (not counting BU) than for SV. Showing that people that took the time to set up a node to maintain the relay of transactions and blocks have placed there faith in maintaining the network behind ABC.  If some one set up 1K rPis it would not help maintain the network unless that are located of different networks. Having them on the same network they would spend most of the time updating each other and slowing down the network they are located on. It would be fun to see how they would handle 128mb block or 3 in a row, hopefully 1 would get the block from the net relay it to a 10 others and the remaining 989 would have get the info from the second ten.

2

dinoDevon Yesterday

18 months?

0

homopit Yesterday

That's for software. Hardware is faster. Just two weeks(tm).

5

sqrt7744 Yesterday

Jihan = King John III Sobieski of Poland

0

lazarus_free Yesterday

Pure propaganda for now. Real hash rate speaks.

24

nu1x Yesterday

Why is everyone forgetting 1 million BSV in Jihans hands, it's like you people are.. NPCs.

4

lazarus_free Yesterday

Will he risk losing all of it if BCH SV becomes the only chain?

3

JustSomeBadAdvice Yesterday

> Will he risk losing all of it if BCH SV becomes the only chain? I would. CSWcoin is not a coin I would make an investment in, nor would I keep it. If CSWcoin somehow wins, a lot of people are going to leave the BCH community for greener pastures.

4

autisticchadlite Redditor for less than 30 days Yesterday

i would leave for fiat at that point. if craig can sieze BCH that easily, it speaks volumes about how easy it is to sieze ANY decentralized system

2

nu1x Yesterday

I doubt he needs or intends to use more than 10% of that. And if need arises, literal slow burn of 1 million BSV to slow pump BCH, assures survival of only one coin, as far as I can see.. CSW only has pretend money and bluster. He will pop soon. After / during this whole fiasco, SBI will sue him for fraud. Even in company statements, you have to realize that Calvin's "mineral mining" endeavor is LOSING MONEY EVERY HOUR.

8

impossible_try Yesterday

Aye, Ayre has gone all in on a Fraud. No more hookers for him in the aftermath! Poor Calvin.

7

lazarus_free Yesterday

If he deploys the hash rate to mine empty blocks and do reorg. attacks not all the money in the world can save this chain.

1

nu1x Yesterday

Assuming he has more hashpower / more money to burn, which I doubt to say the least.

4

lazarus_free Yesterday

More hashpower for now.

1

addiscoin Yesterday

The real hash that is speaking right now is doing so at a loss. The smart hash will come at the fork when it matters and money isn't being flushed down the toilet.

33

unitedstatian Yesterday

Looks like SV started mining at a loss on BCH early to drive miners to the BTC chain, then when the HF comes it will spam the BTC with tx's to hold the miners hostage so they'll have to keep mining it otherwise they'll lose the BTC business.

1

lazarus_free Yesterday

If Craig crashes ABC chain it will be a permanent loss for whoever decides to put hash in it. If they are not willing to lose a bit now how come they will come to the rescue when they may lose all funds? No, intelligent hash will stay mining BTC during the fireworks and then continue to mine as normal whatever chain wins. And nobody will bat an eye if this chain is SV because miners at the least don't care.

5

capistor Yesterday

because they have 4x the hash that faketoshi and calvin have.

2

addiscoin Yesterday

Again, nothing matters until the fork. Putting hashrate at a big loss is fucking stupid. But I guess billionaires can do whatever they want.

14

lazarus_free Yesterday

He got his objective look at the futures price. If BCH ACB starts trading at $250 the attack is easier from the beginning. Also you send an important message: "I am willing to do anything to win, you can choose to stay in the sideways (BTC) then join me if I win or join the other side if they win but rest assured that if you choose to fight me in the meantime you have to be ready to lose a lot of money". The strategy is aggressive but it is working and the more time goes by the less reaction time the ABC camp has.

1

addiscoin Yesterday

Sounds like a psychopath lunatic to me.

5

lazarus_free Yesterday

Yeah but it doesn't matter, all that matters is if it wins or not.

4

addiscoin Yesterday

It matters to me. I'm moving to another coin if a money printing monopoly takes over. Won't be the first time I had to move.

6

barfor Yesterday

90k x 13.5Th isn't going to be nearly enough.

16

TiagoTiagoT Yesterday

Every hash counts

4

saddit42 Yesterday

their new miners have up to 28TH..

5

barfor Yesterday

Not available yet: "2 weeks" into December.

3

autisticchadlite Redditor for less than 30 days Yesterday

yes im sure they just manufacture all of those the day before they ship. Yep, not a chance at all that they have already started making hundreds of them each day

4

saddit42 Yesterday

if you order them.. I'd assume Bitmain will have faster access to their own miners..

15

ichundes Yesterday

Combined with Bitmains last hash rate disclosure (2339.21 PH/s in July, so likely a low estimate of their current hash rate) that puts them at >= 3554.21 PH/s. Also there are 850 PH/s by Bitcoin.com, AntPool, and ViaBTC which do not seem to go anywhere despite decreased profitability. I'd guess there will be at least 4 EH/s hashing ABC/BU/XT.

13

ImReallyHuman Yesterday

If everyone is already accusing SV of a 51% attack instead of protecting BCH from an attack from ABC... #then all SV would have to do to maintain 51% is reject a percentage of the new blocks that new miners try to produce. A majority of the hash power can reject any block with impunity. It is technically possible for SV to stop other miners from increasing their hash rate, it's also possible to force other miner's hash rate to go down.

0

slorex Yesterday

Jihan doesn't control Bitmain anymore. The board wants to make money. They will point hashpower at the highest profit. Today that is btc.

0

impossible_try Yesterday

Fake News.

6

ichundes Yesterday

This is wrong and has been updated: https://news.8btc.com/jihan-wu-has-no-right-to-participate-in-bitmains-business-operations-after-quitting-board > Updated: According to a securities authority close to Bitmain, media reports about the company’s directors quitting the board was misread. The main body of Bitmain to be listed is Bitmain Technology Holdings Limited, while the personnel change happens in a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bitmain (Beijing Bitmain Technology Co., Ltd.). The person said companies preparing for IPO usually set up new board of directors to meet the requirements of listing regulations and simplify the board structure to facilitate management. The board adjustment is only a simplification of the structure of its wholly owned subsidiary.

17

slorex Yesterday

Still. Now we understand that Bitmain is not the personal toy of Jihan Wu.

0

ichundes Yesterday

I don't think it ever was. I lived in China for a while and did big projects there. the poeple I know there are a strong indication that you need lots and lots of guanxi (connections) to achieve a business as large as Bitmain there.

6

New_Diet Redditor for less than 2 weeks Yesterday

Yes it will >If this now doubles to 10%, then it would be more than BCH’s entire current hashrate of about 8% of bitcoin’s network. >Meaning they would easily gain the upper hand in any 51% attack by Calvin Ayre or anyone else.

7

theSentryandtheVoid Redditor for less than 60 days Yesterday

Thank god the 51% attack is being orchestrated by someone I support. Yay large centralized corporations to control everything how I want it!

0

pdr77 Yesterday

But that still doesn't give them 51%, just reduces the CSW cartel to below 51%.

15

Giusis Yesterday

The tone of that article sounds like the WW2 propaganda. If you read the "news" while listening to a Russian march in the background you can actually imagine the army carrying the antminers on their back while crossing the Gobi Desert.

I particularly like the part:

"Some don’t have space, so it may be part of the caravan will have to head towards Inner Mongolia, if it hasn’t already".

11

kilrcola Yesterday

> The tone of that article sounds like the WW2 propaganda. I heard from a German friend of mine that Russian winters are great.

2

gold_rehypothecation Yesterday

So? Are you sad that CSW is going to lose face along with all the trolls?

3

etherbid Yesterday

How does it feel to have a man come in and white knight for you?

0

dank_memestorm Yesterday

*manlet

1

gold_rehypothecation Yesterday

You tell me

4

etherbid Yesterday

wouldn't know. I'm mining the original bitcoin with SVpool and I'm part of the 51% Defense

0

Giusis Yesterday

I don't think Faketoshi has any more "face" to lose... does he actually has any credibility (apart from his shillers)? lol At the same time i find quite fun the proclamations of the other "faction". From whenever side you look at this, it's popcorn time for me!

4

jbrev01 Yesterday

And free money for me if SV fails.

2

CryptoVandal Yesterday

> The tone of that article sounds like the WW2 propaganda. Thanks for the chuckle! You are dead right.

0

CP70 Yesterday

What a shitcoin. BTC miners will come over to make sure this coin splits.

0

Etovia Yesterday

Prepare the top popcorn!

3

sydwell Yesterday

They are already here.

13

Infectedbtc Yesterday

Just wait until the fork, real Bitcoin miners will obviously start mining at that point. They neither have to protect bcash or mine at a loss at this point in time.

1

homopit Yesterday

I think not. They have enough entertainment just watching as it goes down by itself.

1

Windowly Yesterday

hahah i'm afraid they're gathering dust in the Taklaman desert.

8

homopit Yesterday

BCH doesn't have 90k users as a whole, let alone 90k miners. Get real.

0

ABitcoinAllBot Yesterday

Here is the link to the original comment thread. Or you can comment here to start a discussion. Author: coinfeller

1

5 2

theSentryandtheVoid Redditor for less than 60 days Yesterday

muh flippening narrative.

RemindMe! 3 months "call this asshole on his bullshit prediction"

3

RemindMeBot Yesterday

I will be messaging you on [**2019-02-14 13:16:48 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2019-02-14 13:16:48 UTC To Local Time) to remind you of [**this link.**](https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/9wxc4c/the_last_prediction_bch_wins_after_the_fork/) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=[https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/9wxc4c/the_last_prediction_bch_wins_after_the_fork/]%0A%0ARemindMe! 3 months ) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete Comment&message=Delete! e9oezs8) _____ |[^(FAQs)](http://np.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/24duzp/remindmebot_info/)|[^(Custom)](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=[LINK INSIDE SQUARE BRACKETS else default to FAQs]%0A%0ANOTE: Don't forget to add the time options after the command.%0A%0ARemindMe!)|[^(Your Reminders)](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List Of Reminders&message=MyReminders!)|[^(Feedback)](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBotWrangler&subject=Feedback)|[^(Code)](https://github.com/SIlver--/remindmebot-reddit)|[^(Browser Extensions)](https://np.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/4kldad/remindmebot_extensions/) |-|-|-|-|-|-|

1

Buttoshi Redditor for less than 60 days Yesterday

LMAO. What stopped this from happening sooner

3

BTCkoning Yesterday

Thus, my prediction is BCH will overtake BTC within a month or two after the fork.

This wouldn't age very well at all...

7

Randal_M Yesterday

There will be no winners in this shit show. Dump your BCH and buy Bitcoin.

3

cryptacritic17 Yesterday

Nah. I'm ideologically against BTC enough that id rather lose a little more on bch than invest. I'm on ABC's side, but I do plan on hodling some of the SV chain just in case I turn up to be wrong about ABC. Either way, BTC is corrupted, on a software level, so far BCH is looking like it may get corrupted on a social level but I'm hedging my bets against a repeat of the BTC situation.

1

ABitcoinAllBot 1 day ago

Here is the link to the original comment thread. Or you can comment here to start a discussion. Author: MichaelTen

1

2 4

BashCo Yesterday

Peg-outs (transferring back on to the Bitcoin chain) require you to go through a Federation member exchange.

I'm curious to see how this plays out. Basically, you can opt-in without KYC, but when you want to opt back out, you'll have to spread your cheeks wide open and cough (which weakens the point of Confidential Transactions to some degree). Maybe decentralized atomic swap markets will resolve this, but until then I think the friction could be considerable.

Other than that, it sounds kinda awesome. I'm imagining a video game where in-game assets are represented by Liquid Bitcoin tokens which are tradeable in open markets.

$ liquid-cli 1000 1 true

This creates an asset with 1000 units and 1 reissuance token.

What is a reissuance token for?

2

chiefy81 Yesterday

Reissuing more of the asset.

1

trilli0nn 1 day ago

What is the point of an asset? It implies having a value not tied to Bitcoin, but that is impossible. So, isn’t an asset denominated in L-BTC? And doesn’t that make it equivalent to L-BTC?

2

chiefy81 Yesterday

You can issue you own asset representing anything.

1

trilli0nn Yesterday

> representing anything. Huh? It seems to me that it is not possible to issue an asset representing a dollar, a gold bar, a cup of coffee, or anything else that has a value not denominated in BTC. There is a 1:1 peg between the value of BTC and L-BTC, so not sure what the point of assets is, but perhaps I am missing something. What can probably be done is issue tokens with combined tokens such as a L-BTCLTC, by doing an atomic, concerted peg-in and peg-out of BTC and LTC on both blockchains. Liquid is great, but assets I don’t get. /u/adam3us please help me out here haha

1

adam3us Yesterday

in liquid there are both peg assets (liquid bitcoin L-BTC) and liquid issued assets. issued assets are not peg related, and there you rely on the issuers claims - eg if it were a fiat coin, do they have the fiat in their bank account (think like tether, gemini, paxos fiat coins on liquid). or representing other kinds of ownership of stock, bonds, digital collectibles etc. so /u/chiefy81 is correct.

3

trilli0nn Yesterday

Much appreciate your reply Adam, thank you. That means liquid assets are IOUs but so is virtually everything in finance. I am trying to think this through a bit more. It seems to me that if banks and issuers cooperate and exchange assets on liquid, then this can be a disruptive change obsoleting quite a bit of SWIFT messaging and simplifying reconciliation. Probably can reduce the need of clearers as well. Very exciting, all the best Adam!

1

3

2

6

2

1 2

10

1 6

3

4 2

eth03 1 day ago

This seems to be the biggest one for mass adoption(Custodian Reinforcement). Shielded is already going to be default once developers can make all their mobile wallets support shielded transactions as well as the major exchanges. The next biggest hurdle has always been making this easy for non-technical users. Being able to cancel a mistaken transaction is huge.

Custodian Reinforcement

What is it? This includes a variety of potential features that can potentially protect typical end-users as well as specialized custodians. This may include recipient address verification, “vault functionality”, “I Got Burgled Button”, transaction cancellation, or transfer rate limiting functionality.
Who does this affect? All users.
Why is this a goal? A substantial weakness of cryptocurrencies is how difficult self-custody is for wide user bases. By introducing protocol features that can help users protect themselves against theft or loss and/or enable custodian providers to reduce their operational risk, we aim to make Zcash safer for a larger user base.

11

TheronB 1 day ago

That sounds like a horrible idea. Once a transaction is broadcast, it should never be able to be rescinded.

0

eth03 Yesterday

Its not committed to the blockchain yet at that time, so it does not allow mutability of the blockchain. It would sound like a horrible idea if it were implemented the way that you are saying you think it will be.

1

TheronB 4 hs ago

So basically after the transaction is submitted, the time between then and right before the fist confirmation it will be able to be changed? or will it be able to be changed until a certain number of confirmations?

1

tz1tzikas 1 day ago

AFAICT this is smart contracts level functionality. Are we talking about additional precompiles (not sure if this term is used by zcash devs) , opcodes or what?

1

aiyaaabatt 1 day ago

Why are “shielded tx’s as default” not planned? What a joke.

0

minezcash 1 day ago

https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/announcing-zcash-blossom-and-proposed-feature-goals/31891/5

7

tz1tzikas 1 day ago

The ecosystem isn't ready yet. Sapling is just a few weeks old and software/services are just starting to fully support z-addresses. Flypool for example has just become the first pool to support private miners. Completely deactivating sprout addresses is a first step to that end though.

7

MoneroCrusher 2 days ago

How is ASIC/GPU hashrate standing in relation with rewards to voting power?

1

minezcash 2 days ago

I'm not sure hashrate "voting power" is critical in this case. Blossom would be a hard fork to the new parameters (the final PoW is still not decided) and if a faction chooses to stay with the old parameters they can run thier own chain. They just can't call it Zcash, or Zcash Classic or anything with Zcash in the name since they own the Trademark and the Exchanges honor that Trademark. Zcash will remain whatever codebase Zcash Company produces. https://z.cash/blog/future-friendly-fork/ https://z.cash/blog/consensual-currency/

5

baktwobak 2 days ago

I hope AMD Navis are ready by then :)

1