A lot of people have high hopes for Bitcoin Cash. After a very difficult day yesterday when the price dipped to US$884 at one point, we now are seeing a strong rebound. Thanks to a near ten percent gain over the past 24 hours, things are looking pretty solid for this currency. How all of this will play out in the long run remains subject to debate.
Bitcoin Cash Price Above $1,100 Once Again
It is always interesting to see how cryptocurrencies evolve in price over time. More specifically, Bitcoin Cash has thrown a lot of people for a loop, which is not entirely surprising. With the Bitcoin Cash price spiking to US$2,500+ last week and dropping to under US$875 about a week later, it is very difficult to make sense of it all. Novice investors will not be happy with this development whatsoever, as there have been plenty of people who lost money with BCH over the past few days.
At the same time, the people who bought the Bitcoin Cash price dip – which we accurately predicted yesterday – will have made some good money as a result. By buying BCH at US$885 and simply holding it for a few hours, traders made over US$250 in profit per coin. There is a lot of speculation in the Bitcoin Cash market right now, but that is part of what makes cryptocurrencies so valuable to the right people.
The volatile Bitcoin Cash price is not necessarily beneficial to this particular altcoin, though. It is evident there is a lot of good money to be made, but such violent price swings may also make people lose faith in BCH over time. While Bitcoin itself is volatile in its own right, most people will assign terms such as “pump” and “scam” to Bitcoin Cash. That is only to be expected until BCH finds more stable ground, but for now, that seems unlikely.
One thing working in favor of Bitcoin Cash is that there has been a major increase in its trading volume. More specifically, over US$3.46 billion worth of BCH has changed hands over the past 24 hours, which indicates there is a strong demand for this altcoin right now. At the same time, it remains to be seen how much of this demand is due to speculation rather than actual interest in Bitcoin Cash. Of course, that can be said about virtually every other cryptocurrency in existence today.
Unsurprisingly, Bithumb is the main benefactor of the increased Bitcoin Cash trading volume. With over US$1.3 billion worth of volume over the past day, it is evident the South Korean exchange is still very keen on Bitcoin Cash. Bitfinex is in second place, followed by Coinone. Two of the top five BCH trading markets relate to Bitcoin, whereas the other three are fiat currency-based. That’s an interesting situation well worth keeping an eye on.
How things will play out for Bitcoin Cash over the next few days remains to be determined. With the weekend almost upon us, things may head in a completely different direction for no good reason. While this market is pretty volatile right now, there is still the simultaneous potential for stability and growth. No one knows for sure if we will see more volatility or a clam market over the next few days. Rest assured the Bitcoin Cash market will generate a lot of debate over the coming weeks.
“Most people will attribute terms such as ‘pump|” and “scam” to Bitcoin Cash for doing the same. That in itself is only to be expected…”
Because all the facts pointed to a pump and dump and a coordinated attack on BTC. Not, as Jdebunk implies, because of BTC fan loyalty.
Jdebunk is obviously writing a hopeful fluff piece, to pump BCH; Choosing to ignore newsworthy facts.
BCH could be a successful altcoin except for the fact it is controlled by group of bad actors.
BCH is worse at being a currency than BTC is and does not offer a real scaling solution.
bad actors? and who might those be? they hardly edited anything in their fork of bitcoin. its just a simple protocol update to separate from segwit coin, and raise blocksize. segwit on the other hand edited the code so much , its completely different , and it doesnt even work (high transaction fees, long waits)
Have you ever used BCH and BTC for transactions? BTC is nothing in comparison to BCH. Not only that, but BCH has multiple development teams instead of one development team owned by a corporation (Blockstream).
The only bad actors here are Blockstream who’s hijacked Bitcoin as we know it as of early 2017. Bitcoin was amazing up until this year when they decided to artificially keep things slow for their own gain. Shameful.
What’s more shameful are the swaths of BTC HODLers across the internet spewing hate and rhetoric against BCH. Once you use both currencies, there is no comparison. BCH is superior.
So once you use them both and realize BCH is better, what’s the point of Bitcoin anymore?
Bitcoin Cash IS Bitcoin. Bitcoin is BlockstreamCoin.
I have used both and XRP is superior to all. I’ve experienced both quick (within 10 minutes) transactions and slow ones on both networks. (with XRP the transaction was complete before my finger released the mouse click).
BCH, rather than move forward as an altcoin, wants to derail BTC as was evident in the last pump and dump. At the moment, BCH is pure speculation with no infrastructure to spend the coin. And a very small market cap which will allow it to be manipulated by Pump and dump schemes. And, it is too centralized in its mining so it could be controlled easily like OPEC controlled the oil prices 30 years ago.
It is a joke to think the larger block size fixes all -it does not. Now, while BCH is patting itself on the back by delaying what will truly resolve the scaling issue, BTC is moving forward with layer 2 solutions which will make it on par with visa.
Roger Ver for one and the miners. (aka crypto OPEC)
“Bitcoin cash is trying to scale everything on-chain but this doesn’t work for a decentralized system,” Lee said in a telephone interview. “Bitcoin cash is also miner-controlled and miner-centralized. It’s pretty much all sorts of wrong.”
-Lee
Segwit is underused at this time. When people start to migrate off of the BTC 1 addresses and onto the BTC 3 addresses the rewards of segwit will be more evident.
“XRP is superior to all.” I also own XRP and see a long-term path for banks to benefit from Ripple / XRP. However, you can’t really claim it’s “superior to all”, it just sort of shows how little you know about cryptocurrency in general.
A currency where 60% of the reserves are in control by a single company, one where transaction fees are actually destroyed (which is good for XRP) whereas BTC’s fees go towards the miners.
BCH wants to move forward with Bitcoin how Bitcoin should have continue to move forward, PRIOR to being taken over by for-profit Blockstream and being turned into CrippleCoin. You talk about BCH as “pure speculation” as if BTC is not “pure speculation”. It’s “too centralized in it’s mining so it could be controlled easily like OPEC controlled oil prices 30 years ago.” That is quite a stretch, and definitely a new one! Where did you come up with that magical statistic?
The only thing that’s a joke is all the Bitcoin maximalist HODLers who literally only care about seeing Bitcoin’s price rise regardless of the technological implications behind their stupid choices.
Layer 2 solutions equals more fees for you as a BTC user and a ledger that does not record every single BTC transaction that has ever occurred. Congrats on re-writing the whitepaper and going against the original idea of Bitcoin all while claiming to call BCH an ‘altcoin’. You literally make 0% sense. Your entire response was a regurgitation of points you’ve heard regurgitated around the internet. You have no real understanding of the whitepaper or why usability and fungibility are the MOST important things for a currency. You can sit here and pretend that CorporateCrippleCoin is the true Bitcoin. You can sit here and pretend that the original vision of Bitcoin was to have a single for-profit company create a 2nd / 3rd settlement layer “solution” to make things faster all while filling their pockets and taking fees away from miners.
You talk about decentralization like you even know what that means. What would you call a company that is the sole funnel for all future BTC transactions through a side-chain technology called Lightning? I would call that CENTRALIZED, and RIDICULOUS.
Seriously, try harder to make sensical points. You’re just repeating propaganda spewed by Blockstream and censored /r/Bitcoin and it’s pretty obvious.
taking scaling offchain makes segwit no longer related to bitcoin. thats the problem with it. That people call it bitcoin, but it isnt, its segwit. its no different than any other alt coin. th eproblem with it is the legitimacy , of it being referred to as ‘bitcoin’, when it edits so much of the software, whereas bitcoin cash does not.
The lightning network is open source software… It wasn’t developed by Blockstream and they are only one of a handful of organizations currently working on implementing it.
There are emails Satoshi wrote where he discussed the probability of implementing off-chain solutions for bitcoin sometime in the future. The future is happening.
You guys now have an alt coin named bcash that you say follows the original white paper… Implemented with an EDA I don’t remember reading anything about in the white paper… Which you’ve now replaced with a different DAA… that still causes blocks to be mined too fast or too slow.
off-chain solutions are not bitcoin, they are segwit coin. bitcoin has no offchain solutions, there was never any intention to do this in the whitepaper, it is completely different coin. stop brainwashing ppl into believing second layer solutions can be added to bitcoin. we the people want our bitcoin to be CLEAN FROM NEW ADDITIONS just like it was wen it was originally released, pure blockchain. BITCOIN CASH IS BITCOIN. SEGWIT COIN IS SEGWIT COIN. stop this nonsense
I keep hearing this argument that because it’s “open source” that everything is totally okay and nothing could go wrong. Even though the Bitcoin Core repository’s maintainers and top contributors are literally on the payroll of Blockstream and they are the gateholders to which commits get pulled in. Just because something is open source doesn’t mean it’s open and free. You clearly have not worked in software development.
You people think “open source” instantly and unequivocally means there won’t ever be usurpers who influence which commits get merged and peer-reviewed. Do some research and take a look at who the maintainers / contributors to Bitcoin Core are. Then go ahead and look at which ones are employed by Blockstream. Then go ahead and take a look at the fact that Blockstream is a for-profit company, indebted to their investors. They do NOT have large amounts of Bitcoin like the original creators of BTC did, therefor they have less incentive to follow the vision of the original white-paper because they need to turn a profit and make money.
Ahh yes, the mention of the EDA not being in the original white-paper. Cool. Meanwhile, poor people across the world are incapable of using Bitcoin due to insane fees and transaction speeds. The privileged people of the world like you don’t care about this fact, you merely care about the value of Bitcoin going up at whatever cost.
Thankfully people are waking up to the fact that Bitcoin has been taken over by Blockstream. People aren’t buying the fact that just because something is open source means it’s free and open and fair.
If you looked at the original code where the block-size limit is put in place, you’ll see Satoshi wrote inline comments stating that the block limit should be increased in the future when necessary. Well we’re in the future now, and the block size is still 1MB because I guess this for-profit company with no large HODLings of Bitcoin has all of our best interests in mind with their super awesome 2nd / 3rd layer solutions, right?
You guys literally make no sense and keep peddling the exact same regurgitated nonsense. Thanks to Blockstream’s year-long propaganda and Reddit /r/Bitcoin censorship campaign, we have masses of people who are brainwashed and saying the same silly things over and over.
Have fun with your side-chain solutions which slowly siphon fees off customers and miners into the pockets of a single corporate entity.
YOU’RE SO EDGY AND MAINSTREAM!
Exactly. People who have no clue think that because “Bitcoin” has the “Bitcoin” name that it’s the true “Bitcoin”. Ask these same people what it is that makes “Bitcoin” what it is. They won’t ever make sense.
Clearly, what used to make “Bitcoin” was adherence to the white-paper. Now that a corporate entity has control of Bitcoin Core and is calling the shots, Bitcoin is no longer remaining true to it’s original vision. The BTC maximalists and kool-aid drinkers alike are kicking and screaming that because “Bitcoin” has it’s name, it’s the real Bitcoin.
BITCOIN PROPONENTS MAKE NO SENSE
Bitcoin already has tons of offchain transactions. The majority of bitcoin transactions taking place daily are probably offchain. Every transaction within every crypto exchange is offchain. Tipping payment services like ChangeTip are offchain. Payment channels like BitcoinJ are offchain. I don’t hear “we the people” complaining about the offchain solutions like Coinbase, Bittrex, Gemini, etc.
Satoshi said this Satoshi said that. Both sides use him to support their arguments. You might be right that the BCH block size increase is the solution. We’ll see. In the meantime only one side is literally trying to destroy the chain that +90% of the world thinks of as bitcoin. The poor people.There a zillion other cryptos that have lower fees and faster transaction times then BTC will likely ever have… IOTA is my favorite. And in the meantime I saw a post the other day from somebody in Venezuela criticizing BCH pumpers (two weekends in a row now, congrats!) for trying to destroy the BTC currency they rely on to stay alive. You guys have declared war against the brand that has the most legitimacy among mainstream people. Super smart. Last I heard BCH still has fees. Let me know how that goes if/when your blocks ever get full. Lastly, like I posted above BTC already has tons of offchain solutions and most transactions right now are done offchain… ever use an exchange? Funny I never hear anybody complain about those offchain transactions.
THIS IS WRONG. Exchanges are not “offchain” transactions. Every single transactions of Bitcoin through an exchange is recorded in the blockchain ledger.
STOP SPREADING MISINFORMATION.
“BCH transactions cost 1c-10c on average. Bitcoin transactions cost $10 on average currently.”
Bullshit, the average fee for several $20 – $200 BTC transactions I made over the last month was 16 cents. The very last transaction I made just 2 days ago for 1.35 BTC cost $3.
Sounds like you have not been using BTC to speak firsthand about it… just regurgitating a headline.
Your argument is akin to not supporting the constitutional amendments because it changes the constitution.
XRP is superior in transaction times. That is all I implied.
Not sure why you think the 2 coins need to compete (except for the fact you drank the koolaid that claims BCH is the true bitcoin and the imposter must go).
What you fail to grasp is you will need block sizes in excess of 1gb (and processed quickly) to handle transactions on the scale of visa.
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE!!! to fix the situation with block size. GET IT?
RSK and Lightning are both 2nd layer solutions and others are sure to follow.
Less transactions on the level 1 network will equal lower fees. Think of it this way, most of your electronic transactions are via debit card. The fees are so low the merchant pays for them. On occasion, you might need to use a service like WU and you pay a fee. It’s fairly sizable, but, you don’t do it very often so it’s acceptable.
This does not even address the energy consumption for POW. Which will be a major issue if BTC/BCH get into the trillion dollar market cap with 100’s of thousand daly transactions.
You are being short sighted in your rush to see a working cryptocurrency widely accepted. It will take time be it BTC or BCH or what have you.
You are also misguided in thinking there needs to be an adversarial relationship between cryptocurrencies. The USD and Canadian dollar were evenly matched not too long ago, both fiats managed to live together. The EUR, USD, and GBP all have different rates and market caps and they survive together, Gold silver, copper… need I go on?
sounds like your making an analogy that really doesnt make any sense, are you trying to substitute the word ‘bitcoin’ in my previous comment with ‘constitutional amendments’, and ‘segwit’ in my previous comment with ‘changing the constitution’? thats just a really convoluted meaningless analogy if you ask me. doesnt really make any sense wat your saying. ‘bitcoin’ is not related with ‘constitutional amendments’, its a word. and segwit should not refer to it
lol lol go shill your bitcoin trash to some one else. Its dead and its never going to be bitcoin bitcoin cash is a scam coin and for suckers.
The gist of your comment is that because a need that was not foreseen by the drafters of the original document (“white paper”) was addressed by making a change somehow makes bitcoin no longer bitcoin.
Following that logic, those who are constitutionalists are the true americans because “the (constitutional) edits changed so much” of the document. The rest of us are therefore un american.
Segwit was a soft fork. It changed nothing. If you are still using an address starting with a 1 you are not using segwit (congrats, you’re a purest). I can send you a coin from my segwit wallet (addresses starts with 3). You can resend my coin using your non segwit wallet to another segwit or non segwit wallet. At what point during any of those hypothetical transactions is the bitcoin not a bitcoin?
BTC is going to change and grow in ways not foreseen. New technology will offer new solutions, and unforeseen problems will birth ideas that will resolve them.
You also overlook the fact that what makes BTC bitcoin is the miner’s, hashrate, buyers, traders, holders, exchanges, all say it is bitcoin. BCH is an altcoin. Who knows, someday it might be the predominant coin but it will still be an altcoin.
still an inappropriate analogy , software/constitution not a good analogy. segwit changed nothing? what? it allows a second layer which allows off chain transactions. That completely violates everything bitcoin was created for. more like making a second constitution that completely breaks every rule in the first
The larger blocks is temporary, it has BCH mining faster towards the block reward halving. If Bitcoin Implements layers to allow people to exchange value without every transaction needing its own space cluttering up the blockchain, that will scale out to visa numbers efficiently.
Ok, I disagree about your take on the analogy. So let’s get beyond that. You’ve totally ignored all the other points I’ve made.
What’s your solution to get to visa like transactions. Because that is what will be needed to be a true currency.
It is fact, not opinion, that larger block sizes will not get you there.
So what is your vision/understanding?
Do you suggest block sizes in excess of 1gb being solved in less than 10 minutes? Should nothing more be done? If that is your stance, BTC/BCH will only be stores of value and never a currency. Is that not contrary to what BTC/BCH set out to become? A currency.
my solution to visa like transactions is hashgraph. not bitcoin. segwit completely changes wat bitcoin is by allowing off chain transactions. it should not be associated with the name ‘bitcoin’. segwit/lightning is not even close as effective as hashgraph is in terms of visa like transactions while staying decentralizzed
Interesting, I’m intrigued, but isn’t that an “off chain” or 2nd layer solution? Have you looked at RSK?
Segwit just removes the header (Keys and script/code) which is about 65% of the 1mb block and places it in a smaller block at the end. Allowing for “lighter” blocks that can be processed in parallel faster. So I’m not sure why you think that’s such a big deal, Also, it seems to me that if it was, if/when RSK, Hashgraph, or lightning is implemented why couldn’t another soft fork restore the original code?
Remember, segwit is purely voluntary. If you are using addresses that start with 1 you are not using a segwit block.
hashgraph doesnt use a blockchain at all. rsk looks like still uses pow, not sure how much it can scale wen ppl have to wait for bloks to be mined.
HashGraph has a chart that shows it envelopes the blockchain. It would have to interact with the bitcoin blockchain if it were to record final transactions to the ledger, i.e., a side chain or 2nd layer.
If not, it’s not bitcoin.
yes. it would be a new coin. bitcoin is blockchain software , why would
people add a 2nd layer/side chain, thats completely not bitcoin. the
only way to scale bitcoin without getting into a huge debate about how
is to raise the blocksize. thats just realistic way of looking at it.
whether it means ppl with money invested in it wont like it, dunno.
the
ppl investing in segwit bitcoin are just turning the price into a huge
bubble. if all the investors dont want their money to burst they have to
be honest about what bitcoin originally was, and about the superiority
of their competition, such as hashgraph. which is wat bitcoin cash does,
honesty/integrity, keep it the same.
for all the intention of never
‘hard forking’, segwit with lightning just turns bitcoin into a totally
diffferent software, off chain transactions? wtf. terrible. the whole
reason people went crazy about it to begin with was cuz of the security
of 1 public blockchain, huge amount of code review by thousands/millions
of coders on original software that isnt happening with
segwit/lightning and never will, and cuz of the clarity/simplicity of
proof of work preventing malicious actors from being able to hack it
it is super smart. cuz whats hapening right now? segwit bitcoin is in a HUGE BUBBLE. this is because segwit bitcoin is an attempt by developers to scale while tricking mainstream non coding investors into believing they never ‘hard forked’ and therefor hold primary legitimacy to the ‘bitcoin’ software. this will never work long run. their software in fact isnt even compatitible with earlier versions, and if you look at off chain transactions in lightning, that arguably is a hard fork since this was never in the original whitepaper, and is a complete change of the consensus protocol. segwit is no longer bitcoin. you cant just claim to be the heir of the bitcoin software and develop it into something it originally never was. if you update the blocksize, you keep the spirit the same, you just update the blocksize. if you add a second layer, you are not keeping satoshi’s software the way it was anymore. your just introducing an artificial limitation of never technically ‘hard forking’, while completely ‘hard forking’ the consensus protocol as described in the whitepaper like CRAZY by allowing for OFF CHAIN transactions. talk about a hard fork.
ya but it varies , i had a recommended fee from electrum wallet just a week ago, that costed 12 dollars! that is extremely unacceptable. no low budget people can ever use it
Then you don’t have a solution for BTC or BCH for that matter. Your entire argument is moot as we are discussing scaling solutions to two blockchain cryptocurrencies. and you’re advocating something completely different. It’s not open source and there is no there, there. What currency would I be using? Certainly not BTC or BTH.
HashGraph also appears to only work within an enterprise network (trusted nodes in a domain). it does not work with random (public) unknow, untrusted, nodes where verification is a must for security. It would be great within the comcast, AT&T or sprint networks for example. If yours and my cell phones were both trusted sprint nodes we’d be fine. but you wouldn’t be able to send to a node on the verizon network.
Hashgraph is a private distributed ledger, its throughput comparable to other private blockchains, e.g., IBM HyperLedger Fabric (700 transactions per second) or Red Belly (400,000 transactions per second). Hashgraph has yet to release concrete technical details for its deployment as a public ledger.
You need to also understand what the segwit soft fork was and is, it’s obvious you have it confused with something else.
As is with the BCH network as well. My retort is to the dishonesty in his comment. I can take another snapshot in time to show the opposite was true.
You also had an option to reduce your fee but chose not to.
You can also choose to send when trade volumes are lower.
hashgraph is not a coin. its an algorithm that was made public , and uses a dag. whatever private ledger exists for it is irrelevant, some1 would have to implement it on public ledger, which may be difficult since the inventor of it patented it in the usa. mbe some foreigner can code it into a public coin. it deals with the problem that bitcoin tried to solve in a much better way. its far superior to bitcoin in practically every way. it is not possible to scale without using a dag graph structure as opposed to pow with blockchain. You are ignoring valid points made on flaws of segwit, and just saying you think i have it confused with something else, or dont understand it, which is false. Anything that allows for off chain trnasactions is no longer bitcoin, fact. u probably have too much money in btc right now ,
nope. only way to get it confirmed within 20 min was above 10 buks
I recovered all of the money they stole from me. They messed with the wrong person when they scammed me. If you want to recover your funds from magnum options as well as other binary option brokers like 24options, reach out to ( cybergoldenhacker at gmail dot com ), They where true to their word when they said to help recover my money from brokers,They’ve recovered a cumulative more than 30million USD. reg