There is obviously a lot of fuss around BCH at the moment with some rumours saying it will become the new main Bitcoin. I bought most of my BTC after the fork so only hold a little BCH. I now feel a little FOMO if I don’t buy more BCH. Is this just all temporary hype or do we need to take BCH seriously?
Google it on Bing! Any investment needs your time investment!! Study before you act!
BCH == SCAM
1 Like
BCH should absolutely be taken seriously (I am not implying you should buy some by this statement). BCH is within the natural order of things when it come to power and control. By design Bitcoin introduced this weakness? and in a theoretical world full of rainbows and sunshine there is 100% consensus in regards to how much power and control is given/accepted vs taken. Want to know the biggest way technology fails? It’s called human nature.
2 Likes
No doubt about it Jepb100. The thing is, the market is divided by 2 different types of people. The developers-geeks-computer guys (and girls), and the speculating investors! The devs are known for their free spirit and they care more about the underlying technology and the development, while the investors want to make money out of this. Clearly, the investors have no idea on what is going on in blockchain. They try to figure it out by looking the graphs. Thats why many uninformed lost their money over 24 hours, buying BCH.
BCH will not succeed because Roger Ver, Jihan Wu and Craig, manipulate it, and no one is there to regulate them. They may have successful careers afterwards or make billions while the market is not regulated, but the coin is only there because they see it as business and not as an innovation.
I am not saying they didnt implement any advantages in their code, but they are common, to other coins too. So why would they stand out from the crowd and profit from it? The community wouldnt accept it, right?
1 Like
cliff high mentiones BCH could gain a lot of popularity in the beginning of next year, simply because it is a better payment method than BTC. This although does not (in my opinion) lower BTC’s value at all. BTC is not a daily payment method, it is a storage of value, where it doesn’t matter that much if a transaction is slow and expensive. The value is, that it is so difficult and expensive to mine. These are the qualities that make it a storage of value, BCH in my opinion will not be used for the same. I also think they can co exist. So maybe get a bit of both and enjoy the growth of both.
Right now there is this huge fight, which makes people forget about all the other amazing good tokens and cryptos.
There is also a lot of talk about that BCH is pushed by some individuals and maybe even some governments in order to try to weaken the BTC. But BTC has already value, and I think BCH can have that too. I hope they can become loving neighbours at some point and enjoy there niche they are good in.
How can you say that? Better payment method? BCH this weekend reached an average of $44/transaction! The fees in BTC remain the same. The BTC price changes and therefore the transanction value in fiat currency grows. Otherwise, it’s rougly 0.001BTC or something like 100.000 satoshis.
On the other hand BCH has a technological value, but its price is manipulative! Nobody knows when Roger Ver will decide to dump all his BCH, leaving the market with a huge supply, without the equal demand. This means we will have a huge drop to the BCH price. Until Ver buys again. This is Pump&Dump.
Here is a very useful website with BTC charts
I just said that from all the stuff I saw and read about this ongoing chat about BCH vs BTC. So I didn’t really check the actual price for a BCH transaction, because I haven’t heard anyone before say that it is similar to BTC in price. I guess it gets expensive because difficulty grows too? I mean wasn’t the hole idea of BCH to make transactions faster and cheaper? And I agree, there is some centrailzed power behind BCH. And of course, Roger can manipulate this market, but I don’t know how much of the total market cap he has in order to really make a huge impact. mr. novogratz could do the same for BTC, whales and sharks are all over the place. The market is volatile to the rich investors and I guess we will see these moves even more in the future. And they don’t care about the technology that much, rather than hyping a coin, bumping it and then sell again. Which includes popular faces like Rogers, some FUD about potential forks etc.
Anyhow, I sit on my little bit of BTC and wait for people to see Dash and Litecoin as potential alternatives for daily cheap transactions.
Cheers 
Just have a look here https://fork.lol/pow/hashrate
I am not telling you off. We are all here to help each other. Before you start reading stuff, you need to understand the fundamentals of the blockchain technology, and various aproaches of the matter. Education is power!
sure, no worries. So you know, I can’t really read these charts, I am not a tech and it’s hard to rap my head around all these words (specially cause I’m not familiar with these english expressions), I didn’t have anything to do with digital anything, chart reading, markets in general and virtual money. So the help is appreciated 
. What is an exahash? And what is difficulty retarget?
So if I read it right, the speed isn’t really different right? the cifficulty is though is a bit different. So would in fact the BCH transaction fee be the same, in case its value would be the same as BTC?
Akihabara, I have to partially disagree with you here. An idea or opinion is valid no matter what. It is valid to the person speaking it and it is valid to have in essence a conversation. In addition, opportunities to learn on both sides are lost if people do not feel comfortable voicing their opinions especially if the ideas are dismissed by a subjective criteria, aka the concept “do more research before you speak”. On the flip side, one thing I dislike about written posts is that a light hearted “that’s not right” that you would say to friends doesn’t always transfer well in print. I actually encourage my friends to literally say “that’s bulls…t” to me because it is done in the spirit of good conversation. That being said, it is nice to see the passion and the posting of more information to learn and the subsequent follow up questions about the informational link. It shows you both care to actually communicate at a real level.
1 Like
BTC is still my faviorate. I might buy some BCH if it drops to $400
1 Like
@David_Wyness, David do you think it is going to drop or do you think that train has passed in regards to the $400 level?. I have nothing to base these comments on and I have literally done NO research (I can actually hear a particular friends voice in my head saying *what going to come out of your mouth next is going to be bul…t") but I thought that BCH is China’s underground ploy to gain power by locking in ownership of the BCH network with the Chinese miners. China has cheap power controlled by the government and I believe the shutdown is an opportunity for the government to consolidate control, build its own mining network and seize global power so that when they “allow” the masses to reenter the market they only make BCH legal and they have the market control that they are making the power play for. Lol, crypto is fun, you never know what is going to happen until time passes and that’s my crazy idea of the day.
1 Like
Bitcoin is supposed to be a currency, so its value is derived from its function as a transaction medium. Bitcoin has become a lousy transaction medium because it can only log 1 MB of data every 10 minutes for a global transaction system that thousands of people are trying to use.
Bitcoin’s fundamental value as a currency is not good anymore, so people are saying its value is in being a store of value, which is self-referential. This is bubble talk.
I like that BCH is there. I think it will keep BTC in check. Bitcoin core has not been upgrading Bitcoin in timely manner, and they haven’t been paying attention to what non-bitcoin-millionaires want. Everyone loves BTC right now because it keeps going up in price in the market, but that kind of empty popularity doesn’t last, markets are fickle.
I still hold Bitcoin because I know markets are irrational, but I have more hope for some Alt Coins to be actually useful currencies in 10 years.
1 Like
BCH from a tech point of view is great. Like every other project. BUT from an investment/trading/financial-in-general point of view is not as reliable as other projects (btc, eth, xrp, ltc…) because Roger Ver holds a lot of BTC as an early investor that he is, and because his direct interest in bch and his personal wealth of course, can and does manipulate the BCH value. New investors or not so well informed investors put their money onto a fixed bet. I hope that makes a bit more sense.
Regarding to the “do you own research”, i am that type of person who motivates others to seek their own truth. We are here to express our opinions and give help, but sometimes we might be wrong to others, especially them who didnt dig deep in the cryptocurrency. So it’s much more preferable for them to study first, and then come back for a healthy debate. I apologize if my post looked more like “i dont care to answer”, but in reality it is “i do care, thats why i want you to educate yourself”. That’s the reason i post informational links, so anyone can read from a third source.
Back to the topic, BCH can theoritically surpass BTC over the time, but practically it’s a 3 persons toy and quiet unlikely that they will not P&D it again in the future. P&D it, makes the investors loose their trust, and they wont put their mone again into something unreliable and high risk, right?
In my point of view if people want to use BCH as everyday cash, the price of 1BCH has to stay low, in order to keep transaction fees low. So i would bet on a low BCH price than a high price!
Lets see 
1 Like
wow thank you
You are right, I think it is important to talk in a productive way. I am not a tech at all, learning about all this from scratch (I mean I didn’t know what RAM is 5 months ago and find myself programming daily for hours now just to learn how this works)… I really appreciate any comment and help and hope we can keep it productive. Thanks again
@Jepb100 I am not necessarily saying that I think it will drop to $400. I just kind of hoping it does so that I can buy a decent portion at a good price.
I still don’t think it will overtake BTC but it seems more clear that it’s not a complete write off.
1 Like
@Brent BTC is working on the lightening network. It’s a huge improvement that will speed up transactions and reduce the cost.
Increasing the block size only works for so long before the whole blockchain bevomes to big for normal people to run full nodes, thus centralizing it. So it’s not a long term solution. Cortect me if I am wrong but I am assuming BCH is not seeing anywhere near the same transaction volume at BTC. I could argue that BCH and most other alt coins will face the same problems Bitcoin is facing now with regards to transaction speed and cost when their transaction volume increases. When/if that time comes Bitcoin may well have it’s operational lightening network that can compete with the likes of Visa.
1 Like
It’s questionable whether the lightning network will ever be implemented on Bitcoin. This is HUGE fundamental change to the Bitcoin protocol, and Bitcoin Core has shown that it is unwilling to make even minor changes like increase the maximum block size by 1MB.
You’re right that BCH is not seeing the kind of volume that BTC is. It has only had a few blocks that actually reached 8MB, most of its blocks are around 100kb. Consequently, the BTC blockchain is still larger than BCH. The current size of BTC chain is 143GB over a 9 year period, and it would still be 143GB if BTC allowed 8GB blocks that whole time. There would have just been much less congestion and smaller fees at peak times.
Such minor increases in block size don’t have any significant effect on centralization. The vast majority of users don’t run full nodes anyway, and the few true believers that do aren’t going to balk at adding a maximum of a couple of terrabytes of memory every 5 years. A 1MB block limit only benefits Miners who get a lot more fees for a congested network.
The lightning network is a network of nodes to handle arbitration off-chain. It’s basically Visa married to the blockchain. The question is, why marry them? If you’re going to have off-chain arbitration, why not just keep it completely off the bitcoin network? Let Visa be Visa, and bitcoin be bitcoin. That way, people have a choice over the level of security that they want for a particular transaction.
The lightning network centralizes arbitration of bitcoin at the cost of opening security holes that need to be managed. It’s been used on litecoin for a few months now, which is an argument in favor of it, but it could take years for security flaws and problems to become evident, especially since no one uses litecoin as a transaction medium but just trades it like all other altcoins.
2 Likes
I am just dropping this link which i found really interesting few days ago on twitter.
Contains all the information one needs to learn in order to understand BTC in depth.
@Brent You definitely raise some good points there Brent. Bitcoin improvements can be sluggish I think that is mainly due to lack of consensus on an upgrade. If everyone is in favour of the lightening network then it should be implemented quicker. The block size and segwit are issue the community could not agree on, hence the hard fork and very slow scaling debate.
I am not writing off BCH I now think it’s worth keeping hold of some. I just domy see it taking over BTC.
If BCH was seeing the volume that BTC was then instead the 8mb blocks instead of 1mb blocks would turn a 143Gb blockchain into 8x that. That’s not out of the realms of what people could store but it will encourage more people to run light nodes than full nodes. Obviously as it stands now most people don’t run full nodes but this would exacerbate that fact even further. We have got to look at this from the futures point of view. What if in 5 years time as we all hope Bitcoin will be mainstream. Let’s say there are 1000 times more transactions than there are now. Are we just going to make the BCH block size 8Gb? If so how big is the block chain going to be then? I know memory is getting bigger and cheaper but I think there would be very few people who could host a blockchain that big.
Yes the 1mb block chain is restrictive and increasing it a little would not be a huge problem but it is not a permanent solution, just a quick fix in my humble opinion.
I don’t know the technical in and outs of the lightening network, just the basic idea behind it. It does make sense to me and I believe ETH has a similar scaling proposal, I think it’s named Raiden. There will be no doubt issues to work through with the lightening network, a concern of mine is the possibility of extra fees. Though it still seems to make more sense than a block chain that is 1000’s of Tb.