×
top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]Andydovt 437 points438 points  (513 children)

Why is bitcoin cash so bad? I’m new please be gentle.

[–]Precious_Twin 29 points30 points  (3 children)

There is a long standing debate between different factions in the crypto community on the best way to handle certain technical aspects of Bitcoin (BTC). Last year Bitcoin Cash (BCH) was created which is very similar to bitcoin but with the technical changes that were being debated, but this is all besides the point. Just know that BTC and BCH are different and some of the people who support one coin disagree with people who support the other.

The two groups can be very contentious and belligerent towards each other, and this article isnt saying much about the technical differences between the two coins, but rather is presenting the idea that BCH supporters are intentionally misleading people into buying BCH rather than BTC, and that the largest crypto exchange (kind of an online bank that lets you buy, sell and trade crypto coins) which started trading BCH awhile ago, shouldn't trade BCH anymore.

[–]PenisRain 8 points9 points  (1 child)

Let's not forget that the owner of Antminer created BCH to continue exploiting the ASICBoost vulnerability that was fixed in Bitcoin.

[–]Druxo 375 points376 points  (310 children)

First - what the article is talking about. Bitcoin Cash is trying to hijack Bitcoin's brand, trying to trick users into thinking it's the real Bitcoin when it's not.

Now it doesn't really matter what site of the fence you're on, this is shady as fuck. You had your fork, you called it Bitcoin Cash, fine. But trying to trick innocent people into thinking it's Bitcoin and not Bitcoin Cash, that's low.

Beyond that, if you actually want to compare the two technologies, that is a different more complex story that has been beaten to death.

[–]magpietongue 145 points146 points  (155 children)

If I make a Linux fork, surely it's still Linux. The argument around whether or not Bitcoin Cash is or isn't Bitcoin can get absurdly academic. I don't think it matters as long as the two have independent tickets, and market participants do their due diligence.

[–]Randomd0g 105 points106 points  (114 children)

It's not really like that. It's more like if you made a Linux fork called 'Ubuntu Monkey' and kept tweeting that it was the 'true Ubuntu' and that the original was the fake knockoff.

[–]Faceh 62 points63 points  (104 children)

So which fork is the 'true' Ethereum?

[–]lezorte 24 points25 points  (70 children)

Technically Ethereum classic. While the fork become more popular than the original, it never claimed to be "the blockchain where that one transaction was never reversed" because that's not what it is

[–]Faceh 43 points44 points  (69 children)

While the fork become more popular than the original, it never claimed to be "the blockchain where that one transaction was never reversed" because that's not what it is

But isn't it confusing that they kept the name despite not being the original?

That's the claim in this thread. What entitles a fork to take the 'original' name in Ether's case but not Bitcoin's? If people want to argue BCH is NOT entitled to have the 'Bitcoin' name at all, I just want some consistency instead of mental gymnastics.

Why aren't we complaining about Ethereum classic causing confusion for Ethereum buyers?

[–]lezorte 21 points22 points  (19 children)

Honestly you're probably right. If we want to be fair about our expectations of these technologies, we should probably be holding them all to the same standard.

[–]Faceh 25 points26 points  (0 children)

Or just recognize the consensuses can be built by communities independent of the software's rules or preset naming 'conventions', and if everyone decides to call something "Bitcoin" or "Bitcoin Cash" or "Bcash" or whatever, then it makes little sense to make arguments that the name belongs to the software itself.

The code is what the code is, it either works or doesn't, and the name we use for it is for our convenience, not because it has any intrinsic connection to the software. The name is an abstracted symbol for a concept, and sometimes the symbol is altered or it begins to represent a different concept.

In my view the argument over the naming of the various forks is just obfuscating the fact that every 'faction' wants the benefits that come with being recognized as 'Bitcoin,' and so everyone will level whatever fallacious or misleading arguments they can to convince people to call their chosen fork 'Bitcoin' and maintain the consensus in their favor. In my opinion it'd be better to just let whichever software works better prove its own worth but absent that the people will scramble for whatever advantage they can get.

Unless we grant some central authority the power to impose the name (which would betray the whole point of decentralization) then we should accept that the community will eventually choose the names regardless of what individual parties want, or the actual code the network runs on.

(Or maybe somebody can come up with a Blockchain-based method of codifying coin names...)

[–]SGCleveland 8 points9 points  (2 children)

I think it's simpler than this. Bitcoin (or Ethereum) is ruled by "consensus". "Consensus" is subjective, like value. Individuals will disagree on what each coin is "worth" and so they will disagree on who is following "consensus", since these concepts are linked. Ethereum Classic may be following the original rules, but many more people/market power have accepted the "consensus" that Ethereum post fork is the right one.

Likewise, I'd argue that there is a greater "consensus" that the "original" or "most accumulated work" chain of Bitcoin is the "real" Bitcoin. You could look at accumulated mining difficulty since that should reflect user demand, but perhaps market capitalization is a useful measure as well. I'm not sure that anyone can exactly define "consensus" because it's a mental state, a market opinion.

[–]YoungThurstonHowell 5 points6 points  (2 children)

The true Ethereum just like the real Bitcoin is decided by consensus. Just because a small minority of people wanted to keep the old immutable chain alive doesn't entitle them to keep the name, even if they did have the moral high ground. If being the "original" chain, despite not having majority support mattered then Bitcoin Clashic would be the real Bitcoin Cash.

[–]blangerbang 5 points6 points  (0 children)

bcash has made several changes to their "original" chain. It has no standing saying its the true bitcoin anyway

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Correct. This is exactly the same situation as Coke. There is no longer just Coke, there is Coke Classic and New Coke. That's how hard they forked the two recipes - they threw away the old name entirely.

[–][deleted]  (3 children)

[deleted]

    [–]mcbergstedt 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    So from my understanding, there was a big heist with Eth a few years ago and to "fix" it, they hard forked Eth and made the fork the new Eth to keep the hackers from getting everyone's money.

    I'm guessing it's more of a situational thing, where Eth was forked to save millions, and BTC was forked because they wanted to paint the elephant that is bitcoin gold and call it faster.

    [–]goatpig_armory 1 point2 points  (4 children)

    Why aren't we complaining about Ethereum classic causing confusion for Ethereum buyers?

    Because this is r/bitcoin and we don't really care about Ethereum, all things considered. If we're going down to the semantics, at least the eth forks are named sensibly.

    The side that forked kept on the name Eth because that's what the Ethereum community wanted. Put to the test, they realized they preferred a centralized, undisputed governance and a loose, untested framework over code as protocol rigidity and the technical competition at the top that would ensue.

    Etc deserves the name classic, since at least semantically, they do no deviate from the original tenet of Ethereum, which is "code is law".

    With BCH, the situation is reversed. A minority is forking off, and claiming they are the true depository of the original tenets. That statement is not true.

    Now if BCH wants to argue they're the better iteration of Bitcoin, there's a discussion to be had. But that's not what they are arguing. They are arguing they are the only true Bitcoin, ergo everybody else is just frauds. That claim is simply false.

    [–]-bryden- 7 points8 points  (1 child)

    Where's the lack of consistency??? The community decided in both cases. In the case of Bitcoin, the community decided against the Bitcoin Cash fork. In the case of Ethereum, the community decided to go with the fork.

    You're spreading FUD with naming intentionally. Shame.

    [–]slashfromgunsnroses 21 points22 points  (25 children)

    Since its a project centralized around one person (Vitalik) he gets to decide.

    [–]BaleeDatHomeboi 38 points39 points  (24 children)

    You mean the same way bitcoin project is centralized around the core devs?

    [–]destinationexmo 8 points9 points  (8 children)

    I've been around for a very long time and that's not how I saw it go down. There was months of debate and attempts to reach consensus and compromises. In the end the majority of people seemed to agree with what the core developers proposed as a solution. At that point you can't just say. Well because these few developers don't agree and a minority of users we are obligated to implement their BIPs

    I would be interested to hear what core developers would say if hypothetically someone comes up with a way to scale infinitely on chain with small blocks. I'm not sure it's even possible but I would be curious if they would implement it or stick with layer 2 solutions. That to me is the question that needs to be asked

    [–]overkiller1115 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    Bit Ethereum and bitcoin is kinda centralized in development. But in both cases the true bitcoin and ethereum is decided by the community support. More people support btc than bch = btc is the "true bitcoin". Same goes for eth

    [–]slashfromgunsnroses 5 points6 points  (7 children)

    No. In case of eth there is only Vitalik who gets to decide. Its literally his project. Bitcoin would likely be the same if Satoshi was still around, but hes not.

    [–]LORD_HODLEMORT 9 points10 points  (4 children)

    Oh he's around

    [–]-bryden- 9 points10 points  (0 children)

    Guys! My stylography fingerprint detector says LORD_HODLEMORT is the true Satoshi!!

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [deleted]

      [–]coinpapasito 6 points7 points  (0 children)

      It's not only the fake knockoff component that's disturbing. It's going on CNBC calling yourself the "Bitcoin Jesus" and then ripping on Bitcoin the entire segment

      It's like watching your brother in a fight with a stranger and siding with the stranger to beat up your brother.

      Roger Ver is Benedict Arnold

      He shot the entire crypto industry in the foot. Don't asshats like him realize that to the masses Bitcoin is crypto? It hurts everyone in crypto when you make negative comments against Bitcoin

      [–]QPatty 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Where do they say the original is a fake knockoff?

      [–]slow_br0 7 points8 points  (0 children)

      people lost a lot of money because they couldn't tell the difference when sending coins for example. thats a completely different thing. bcash is toxic as hell mostly because of the huge marketing bs from roger ver that tries to leech of bitcoins name trying to confuse newbies.

      [–]Viper1967 2 points3 points  (5 children)

      The code is still bitcoin but bitcoin is more than just code. Think developers, brand, community.

      [–]Holzkohlen 64 points65 points  (101 children)

      We would not even be talking about BCash if it were not a fork of the actual Bitcoin blockchain.

      [–]Pannuba 59 points60 points  (98 children)

      This. Only reason bcash is successful is because it has "Bitcoin" in the name.

      [–][deleted]  (26 children)

      [deleted]

        [–]666happyfuntime 4 points5 points  (0 children)

        Also the guy who is pushing "Bitcoin cash" wns Bitcoin.com, and actively uses it to confuse, this to me is the shadiest part

        [–]YWorkFT 2 points3 points  (0 children)

        Because not a single other fork is claiming to be Bitcoin, they're their own Bitcoin Project, like UbuntuMate, you don't see Ubuntu variations claiming to be the one true Ubuntu.

        [–]nicky1088 2 points3 points  (0 children)

        Because those other forks don’t try to advertise themselves as the one and only bitcoin.

        [–]Pannuba 14 points15 points  (20 children)

        Because Cash is the first fork, and because the others aren't trying as hard to replace Bitcoin.

        [–]Jzargos_Helper 18 points19 points  (1 child)

        Cash is not the first fork Bitcoin Classic was before Bitcoin Cash. There could have been others too but I am not sure.

        [–][deleted]  (6 children)

        [deleted]

          [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

          SHA256

          Other alts use or have used the same POW

          [–]bitusher 1 point2 points  (2 children)

          There were multiple UTXO spinoffs that proceeded Bcash , byteball and bitcore are 2 examples among others.

          [–]hugokhf 22 points23 points  (49 children)

          Does this hint that crypto in general is a massive bubble? People throwing money into it without knowing what they are actually buying into

          [–]Pannuba 29 points30 points  (1 child)

          Just because there are people blindly buying things they don't understand doesn't make them the majority. Actually after this crash it seems like we lost most if not all the weak hands that bought "magic internet money" to become rich fast, not knowing how it works and why.

          [–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (37 children)

          You don't need hints for that. Pretty much all crypto coins currently have a value based on media attention and market manipulation, not utility.

          Positive press? Value bubbles up. Negative press or even measures taken against it? Value crashes into a pit of despair.

          None of it ever has anything to do with it's actual utility.

          [–]gypsytoy 2 points3 points  (36 children)

          Not true of Bitcoin. Bitcoin's utility is it's decentralized, consensus-based, immutable network. That is its intrinsic value. Most other coins lack this to one degree or another and serve no additional purpose beyond what Bitcoin does.

          [–]666happyfuntime 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          Most nodes most tested most market cap

          [–]SatoshiNakaMocha 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          Yeah i would say its in a massive bubble compared to its current use/function. I mean right now the only thing i can do with my bitcoin locally is i can buy coffee. Yes it is overvalued right now. But if adoption comes along and it can start being used more easily and at more places then today's prices are massively undervalued. Only time will tell

          [–]typtyphus 4 points5 points  (2 children)

          look at Monero gold. Litecoin gold. Bitcoin Silver. All ERC-20 tokens

          [–]IPTV_throwaway8453 4 points5 points  (1 child)

          All ERC-20 tokens

          Yeah, no. Lots of good projects using an ERC20 (BAT, OMG, ENG, REP, REQ)

          [–]nkorslund 4 points5 points  (0 children)

          There's an enormous difference between "crypto is a bubble" and "crypto is IN a bubble". There will always be massive speculative price swings on top of whatever fundamental value is there, and it doesn't really say much about the fundamental value either way. We're in the aftermath of one of those price bubbles right now after all.

          [–]zomgitsduke 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          And true hodlers received both sides of the chain

          [–]Cr3X1eUZ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          It's like that episode of Star Trek TNG where Will Riker got duplicated (i.e. forked) in a transporter accident. One went on to become a Commander and the other one got left behind on a planet and thought everyone forgot him.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chances_(Star_Trek:_The_Next_Generation)

          [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

          How is it worse than BTC? Seems like the fork enhanced the code by increasing the block size, no?

          [–]Terminal-Psychosis 48 points49 points  (91 children)

          Trying to hijack the resources of another project (like name, symbols, in this case blockchain too) is looked down on with extreme prejudice in all of Open Source, not just Crypto, and for damn good reason.

          Ver pulling this shady shit with BCH just proves he has zero credibility or integrity. And Bcash is just the latest in a long line of such scams of his. XT, Classic, Unlimited, mixed up in Jihan's scams btc1 & 2x, and now Bcash.

          Not to mention that BCH has hardly any dev team to speak of. The few yahoos that he can get to work for him (working directly for Ver, mind you, another very bad thing) have shown themselves to be completely incompetent again and again. They couldn't even figure out how to increase block size!

          BCH is not an altcoin, it has no worth as an actual cryptocurrency. What it is, is simply yet another get-rich-quick scam from a known bad actor (Roger Ver).

          [–][deleted]  (76 children)

          [deleted]

            [–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (13 children)

            Think about Linux distributions. You don’t see Ubuntu masquerading as Debian++ or something, and their developers don’t try to convince people that it is the REAL Debian. Why should it be ok for Bitcoin Cash proponents to tell the public that Bitcoin Cash is the REAL Bitcoin? We shouldn’t have something so misleading in such a volatile market where millions of people’s money is involved.

            [–]GO_RAVENS 30 points31 points  (36 children)

            Like /u/AxiomBTC said, it's not the fork that deserves criticism, it's the deliberately misleading tactics that are being used. Using the /r/BTC subreddit, @Bitcoin twitter handle, and Bitcoin.com URL to manipulate people into thinking you're representing Bitcoin when you're actually representing something else is unethical.

            [–][deleted]  (35 children)

            [deleted]

              [–]kernelmustard29 2 points3 points  (13 children)

              Who are you to define Bitcoin for them? If they suggested your advocacy of the Core chain is illegitimate, is that argument any less valid than yours?

              We are the Bitcoin Community that continues to follow the consensus rules. There is no "other" Bitcoin. Anything else is a hard forked altcoin.

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_(computer_science)

              As has been stated many times in this thread, nobody begrudges the Bitcoin Cash community for forking off with new consensus rules that more closely align with their principles and beliefs. The problem is that they are intentionally claiming to be "the real Bitcoin" and using bitcoin.com and @bitcoin along with the Bitcoin Cash name to perpetrate their actions.

              If the Bitcoin Cash project was everything that its advocates claim it is, then they wouldn't need to lie about it being "the real Bitcoin" or infringe on the Bitcoin brand name.

              [–]AxiomBTC 20 points21 points  (3 children)

              No one has a problem with them Hard forking. The only issue is the intentional brand confusion. In fact, I was perfectly fine calling their fork 'bitcoin cash" until they started using this shady as fuck tactic. That's why I exclusively call it bcash now.

              [–]-bryden- 10 points11 points  (1 child)

              Exactly this. There's a reason I call it BCash but I'm ok with calling Bitcoin Gold by the full name. Recognizing where your fork came from in your name is ok, and in fact it's generally a best practice for the most part. But pretending that you're the original Bitcoin and that "Bitcoin Core" somehow forked from you - unacceptable. Bitcoin community should exile BCash.

              [–]willy92wins 27 points28 points  (21 children)

              Ironically, they have an unscaleable way of scaling

              [–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (18 children)

              Could you elaborate why it is unscalable?

              [–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (1 child)

              The entire article is literally about your question. As you're new, a suggestion is to read the articles posted here to learn more.

              [–]umilmi81 16 points17 points  (5 children)

              Bitcoin Cash is not bad. Bitcoin Cash is the market response to a stupid decision by Bitcoin. Bitcoin refuses to make reasonable and easy changes that increase the volume of trading that is possible. Bitcoin Cash is just Bitcoin with those very easy and reasonable changes implemented.

              Bitcoin Cash is the ideal of open source. When a pack of assholes tries to ruin a product someone just forks it and does the right thing.

              [–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (3 children)

              I don't think any of us cares that Bitcoin Cash exists or not. The issue is using @bitcoin, bitcoin.com, r/btc to sell Bitcoin Cash as the real bitcoin.

              If they marketed Bitcoin Cash transparently and werent trying to create confusion there wouldnt be an issue. The article does a pretty good job of laying out the issues the community has with BCH and the shady way its marketed.

              [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

              And I, as vivid supporter of the coin that shall not be named, agree with you. They should not sell it as bitcoin.

              [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

              Did you read the article?

              [–]AngryFace4 4 points5 points  (0 children)

              Why is bitcoin cash so bad?

              It's not. It's just as legitimate as any other crypto project, more-so than most. The problem is they have a different ideology in terms of how to scale the coin, one which they claim is more in-line with the original intent of the coin, and this split of ideologies fragments the community, thus hurting the pockets of those who wish for wealth to be concentrated in their favorite coin.

              As to the actual technology, it's a reasonable idea that BCH has, though I'd argue that their scaling solution requires more on-going maintenance. The trade off is that you do not need to invoke off-chain solutions to accomplish it. It's really too early in this market to truly know which idea is better for the long term.

              [–]ItalianAlaskan 238 points239 points  (103 children)

              My buddy finally got into crypto and accidentally bought BCash on Coinbase yesterday when he meant to buy Bitcoin. It pissed me off when he told me that.

              [–]Vengealus 200 points201 points  (5 children)

              Then, I would suggest to your friend to read first before jumping on the cryptocurrency train...

              [–]BOMinvest 45 points46 points  (3 children)

              I agree with this. Buying crypto should not be an impulse. That is like someone complaining that they bought AMC stock (theater company) instead of AMD stock (chip maker). Now bitcoin.com wallet suggesting BCH and coinmarketcap listing bitcoin.com as a bitcoin website...those are separate issues.

              [–]Vengealus 2 points3 points  (0 children)

              bwahahahahahaha....you will have a huge WTF moment if you have bought AMC stock while you thought you bought AMD stock (Ehm...what comes after A...B...C...ehm.....)...I understand the confusion when you are new to this segment, I am also a newbie to this segment (who isn't nowadays)but still, I would tell that person, if you don't understand the abbreviation, then Google is your friend and also I would advise the person to take time to investigate before jumping on any trains...

              [–]emmytee 4 points5 points  (1 child)

              But yet everyone wants the tech to go mainstream. It should be made user friendly and shady shit like this shouldnt be on exchanges

              [–]A________AA________A 64 points65 points  (4 children)

              They are doing it on purpose. Coinbase CEO is a know buddy of Roger Ver.

              If you go to bitcoin.com and download their wallet. The wallets defaults to BCH... so newbies WILL definitely get burned.

              I have boycotted coinmarketcap due to their insistence of listing bitcoin.com as one of bitcoin's website.

              BitPay too... I suggest we should do our part to boycott coinmarketcap, coinbase, and bitpay.

              [–]Okami_oki 1 point2 points  (1 child)

              Where would you suggest buying bitcoin?

              [–]fenderf 63 points64 points  (48 children)

              I wonder how many people have lost money this way...

              [–]chriswheeler 36 points37 points  (4 children)

              How much money would they really have 'lost' - coinbase has a BCH/BTC trading pair, so they would only lose the fees once they realise their mistake. Also to be 'investing' in Bitcoin without knowing the difference makes me think they should be researching a little further before buying anything.

              [–]magpietongue 14 points15 points  (1 child)

              This. If you're at a point where you're investing into a highly volatile currency that has nothing but potential use cases underpinning its current and future value, be a fucking adult and do some research.

              I have no sympathy for the people who 'lose their money' thanks to their own negligence.

              [–]iaccidentlytheworld 5 points6 points  (0 children)

              Call us assholes, but i'm on your side COMPLETELY

              [–]midipoet 63 points64 points  (26 children)

              Lost money? Still have money. Just not the currency they initially wanted. And in fairness it's through their own mistake as well. Blaming it on an external is denial of the root of the problem - which is essentially hasty buyers.

              [–]Jiten 8 points9 points  (1 child)

              The worst thing is if they have a bcash wallet and end up on a site that sells Bitcoin and somehow manage to persuade the bcash wallet to give them a Bitcoin-style address. The bitcoins are then sent to the bcash-wallet's address and customer ends up thinking he was scammed since his wallet is not recognizing the transfer.

              The customer then either figures out how to safely import the private keys into an actual bitcoin-wallet or is left empty handed. It's often difficult to get them to even try that since they're too convinced they've been scammed by the marketplace.

              [–]midipoet 2 points3 points  (0 children)

              Yes i understand the pitfalls that you describe. That is why there should have been an onus on BCH - when they forked - to provide measures to protect against this. A change in the address format (which came eventually, but not soon enough).

              [–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (8 children)

              Bitcoin Cash straight-up LIES about what it is. Bitcoin.com (The website for Bitcoin CASH, NOT Bitcoin) shows a picture of a wallet with BTC in it. Why do that for any reason other than deception? Their abbreviation is BCH.

              It's a con job.

              [–]midipoet 8 points9 points  (4 children)

              It's a con job.

              that's debatable.

              They believe they are the real Bitcoin - so they have every right to claim to be. It is not like the name, brand, logo, or websites are copyrighted or trademarked.

              [–]easypak-100 3 points4 points  (1 child)

              they don't believe it, they tell you they believe it

              [–]DannyDaemonic 8 points9 points  (8 children)

              And in fairness it's through their own mistake as well. Blaming it on an external is denial of the root of the problem - which is essentially hasty buyers.

              Did you even read the article? It gives 3 ways in which people are being deliberately tricked into buying BCH.

              [–]midipoet 17 points18 points  (1 child)

              Can you not read what i was responding to?

              I was not responding to an article (if i was i would have replied directly to the thread). i was responding to a user that noted that his friend had gone onto Coinbase and accidentally bought BCH.

              [–]rabbitlion 1 point2 points  (0 children)

              As far as we know there is zero people who have.

              [–]violencequalsbad[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

              Many, according to an exchange owner I know.

              [–]FermiGBM 3 points4 points  (3 children)

              I wonder how many people have made money this way...

              [–][deleted]  (3 children)

              [deleted]

                [–]Zatouroffski 8 points9 points  (0 children)

                wasso wasso wasso wasso wasso wasso

                [–]gl00pp 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                WADAMAGONNADOO?!

                [–]Ninja_Fox_ 6 points7 points  (0 children)

                My wife tell me its a scam

                [–]Shruglife 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                your buddy is up 30% today

                [–][deleted]  (3 children)

                [deleted]

                  [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  So you've responded to one point in the article that talks about 10+ issues. Any objections to the remaining article?

                  [–]easypak-100 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  so you say, 'it's at the top!' that's how they are supposed to differentiate?

                  W!T!F!

                  you are not thinking it through

                  [–][deleted] 25 points26 points  (7 children)

                  Want BCH to go away? Support the changes and fixes that make BTC the best coin to use. And no, I'm not saying that BCH is better than BTC. I'm just pointing out that BTC has problems that need to be fixed, like yesterday.

                  I hold a good amount of BTC and a tiny amount of BCH. That said, as we all know, BTC is next to useless for day to day transactions. The people who bought BTC to get rich quick and make money don't care about that. The people who want to use it for its actual intended purpose do.

                  [–]sevillada 1 point2 points  (2 children)

                  Honestly, part of the problem is that most people that used coinbase wanted their respective bcash so they could dump it. The only way it could be done was by having listed for sells/buys, etc...but a lot of people believed that gave bch credibility because coinbase only supported 3 coins before that...it was partially a case of catch 22

                  [–]robertangst88 93 points94 points  (98 children)

                  BCH is down 40 percent vs BTC.

                  Give it another 2 weeks, yet another alt coin is dying

                  [–][deleted] 39 points40 points  (72 children)

                  Bitcoin Cash was a nice hedge against Bitcoin back in 2017.

                  In 2018? No longer. All eyes are on Ethereum playing that role, possibly even taking Bitcoin's crown on the market cap charts if the fudsters are to be believed.

                  Let's face it. Bitcoin Cash is so 2017.

                  [–]robertangst88 57 points58 points  (0 children)

                  Nah BCH wasn't useful ever. ETH always had trading pairs.

                  [–]paultower 9 points10 points  (28 children)

                  Bitcoin and Ethereum will play as hedges against each other as they potentially take turns in mcap placement which will be good for all of us.

                  [–]kattbilder 9 points10 points  (3 children)

                  I don't think it is very useful to talk about hedge with two historically strongly correlated assets. You gotta have your head deep in the cryptoasset investor sandbox if you believe that ;)

                  [–]pepe_le_shoe 5 points6 points  (0 children)

                  Indeed. EUR/GBP/USD are hedges for crypto.

                  [–]Draco1200 2 points3 points  (1 child)

                  A "Balanced" investment in crypto just in terms of asset allocation would have positions in the most fundamentally and technologically promising existing and emerging AltCoins, and not just BTC ---- but that's not a "hedge", that's just avoiding singling all the risk into one instrument.

                  The price of all crypto moves down with BTC, thus an appropriate 'hedge' against BTC would be:

                  (1) Investments in any companies or assets whose valuation seems to be going down or being suppressed from the market due to competition from crypto, Or who stand to compete with BTC or profit from BTC's demise -- E.G. Stock in Services like Venmo, PayPal, Credit card companies, Banks offering 'pay to e-mail' features, etc.

                  (2) Things like a basket of multiple countries' fiat, mutual funds that invest in real-estate - equities - debt - or convertible instruments, and,

                  (3) Commodity materials such as Copper, OR precious metals like Gold and Platinum.

                  [–]violencequalsbad[S] 30 points31 points  (23 children)

                  People have so much more faith in ETH than I think is justified. They seem so handwavey about their scaling issues - which are far more pressing than bitcoin's I might add.

                  [–]rain-is-wet 22 points23 points  (18 children)

                  ETH - move fast, break stuff, roll back the chain if we do.

                  BTC - move slow, break nothing, can't roll it back if we tried.

                  [–]typtyphus 5 points6 points  (16 children)

                  roll back the chain if we do

                  wait... wat? this is possible?

                  don't know if it's a good thing or not. Sure is interesting.

                  [–]l0rb 12 points13 points  (6 children)

                  Same way it's possible on bitcoin -> if majority of miners agree to do it. Basically it's a hard fork. The difference to bitcoin is that ethereum actually had a successful hardfork when there was a major hack, and they rolled back the chain to return the funds.

                  [–]typtyphus 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  and so now we also have classic. I see.

                  [–]itsjevans 5 points6 points  (0 children)

                  See the DAO hack hard fork

                  [–]RedGolpe 6 points7 points  (1 child)

                  It's actually +120% since fork. Of course it's -40% since ATH, just like BTC is -60% against USD since ATH.

                  [–]RulerZod 18 points19 points  (13 children)

                  Join rogers other coin bitcoin unlimited in the grave

                  [–]atooraya 23 points24 points  (11 children)

                  The fucking idiot went on infowars to promote BCash

                  [–]pickled_cat_turds 7 points8 points  (0 children)

                  Ver needs to go away. He has a punchable face and is a piece of shit.

                  [–]glurp_glurp_glurp 11 points12 points  (5 children)

                  It got postponed until Thursday, I think. Even over in the other sub they're mostly all like please don't associate us with that lol, and the rest are all like but muh ancaps.

                  [–]violencequalsbad[S] 14 points15 points  (1 child)

                  fucking gay frogs again

                  [–]aceat64 5 points6 points  (1 child)

                  The "ancaps" in the other sub are the "it's ok to be fascist if you are fighting socialists and totally not incompatible with the nap" kind of "ancaps".

                  [–]We_Killed_Satoshi 4 points5 points  (0 children)

                  ewwww

                  [–]violencequalsbad[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

                  I guess consensus never emerged.

                  [–]BerryGuns 3 points4 points  (0 children)

                  Yet another? The majority of alts are still rallying hard against BTC, even absolute trash ones

                  [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

                  Bcashers brigading the fuck outta the Medium article...scammers have a lot of time. Real ppl just go about their day. Bitcoin cash is of course obviously a scam. Anyone who believes other wise is simply wrong and stupid.

                  [–]empathica1 18 points19 points  (22 children)

                  I'm not too in the know about this, but isn't bitcoin cash like bitcoin, but with arbitrarily large blocksizes going forward?

                  [–]violencequalsbad[S] 16 points17 points  (13 children)

                  Yes, but with an unscrupulous marketing department and a bunch of scammers playing politics as opposed to actual engineers.

                  Read up on SegWit. This is a fantastic upgrade that engineers hit a home run with. It's in bitcoin because it's excellent. It's not in bcash because Roger Ver is an idiot and Jihan Wu wants to continue using less electricity when he mines via a patent called asicboost.

                  That is pretty much everything.

                  There are smart ways to scale or pretend ways. Making blocks larger doesn't solve the hard questions, it just delays them until later on. This is the method of a politician - they never consider things in long terms.

                  [–][deleted]  (3 children)

                  [deleted]

                    [–]bruxis 2 points3 points  (2 children)

                    Not sure why people care about this topic much. During the initial fork, there was an EDA (emergency difficulty adjustment) to move the difficulty down so that the coin could survive with it's limited hashpower support. If it had kept the original BTC difficulty, the next difficulty adjustment would have taken a very long time to be hit.

                    The EDA itself doesn't do anything harmful, but the sharing of SHA-256 hashpower led to a back-and-forth tug of war for profitability for miners -- also leading to some increased inflation rates on the new chain. There was later a new DAA added (new algorithm to base difficulty on a 144-blocking rolling window average) to help difficulty adjustments be more smooth, and avoid hashpower oscillations (which is good for both chains).

                    [–]PumpkinAnarchy 6 points7 points  (0 children)

                    Isn't bitcoin like bitcoin cash, but with arbitrarily small blocksizes going forward?

                    This is just as true.

                    [–][deleted] 21 points22 points  (10 children)

                    I agree. Any other coin during any other period would not have been put on the Coinbase platform. I don’t see ETH Classic on there.

                    [–]blangerbang 4 points5 points  (3 children)

                    Have you seen Bitcoin Cash Classic? haha

                    [–]violencequalsbad[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

                    Bclashic. Shaken not shtirred.

                    [–]PaulJP 13 points14 points  (1 child)

                    Ahem, I think you mean Bitcoin Clashic. See r/bitcoinclashic and r/bclash (because Bitcoin Clashic Core has their evil money grubbing paws on the main sub and is censoring it to push their own agenda... or something like that).

                    [–]blangerbang 5 points6 points  (0 children)

                    oh
                    my
                    god
                    so much potential there!

                    [–]epsilon4_ 28 points29 points  (5 children)

                    wtf i hate free market now

                    [–]gizram84 6 points7 points  (0 children)

                    Boycotting bad actors is a very acceptable part of the free market.

                    No one is arguing for the government to force coinbase to stop offering Bcash via regulations.

                    [–]violencequalsbad[S] 8 points9 points  (2 children)

                    Coinbase is regulated up the wazoo.

                    I suppose the suggestion is, yes free market, but if you do terrible things as a company, I will stop using you.

                    This article can be read as "Here's your chance to stop doing this awful thing that you're doing."

                    [–]reddit4485 50 points51 points  (40 children)

                    Not only that but the start of the bitcoin crash from $20,000 started exactly when BCASH was offered on Coinbase. Insider traders knew it was going to be offered and started buying on poloniex before it was available on Coinbase. After it was available, someone was buying on Coinbase at almost 3 times the normal price to make it seem like it was worth more than it was. It was so bad Coinbase halted trading and Armstrong had to warn his own employees not to release privileged information. Then Roger Ver admitted insider trading was happening and said it was great for everyone. However this whole episode caused people to panic and all crypto currencies suffered. Now BCASH is worth way less than before the insider trading happened and all others cryptos suffered along with it. I know a lot of other things contributed to the crash but insider trading of BCASH was what precipitated it all. Why would anyone want to buy a coin where a select few have insider knowledge that the rest of us don’t have?

                    [–]Bipolarruledout 25 points26 points  (11 children)

                    All correct but I don't think it has anything to do with the recent downturn.

                    [–]maple_leafs182 14 points15 points  (1 child)

                    Yeah, some people in the sub are delusional, connecting dots that aren't connected

                    [–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (4 children)

                    My hypothesis was that they fucked up the market on purpose by having that 5 minutes of trading, causing news outlets to pick it up, advertising BCH and stirring up demand and excitement while also establishing an artificial and incredibly high price right out of the gate ($4k) and then, when they opened the BCH market the next day at noon it had an artificially high opening price on Coinbase. The smart money dumped ASAP and while there was a little wave down and up again, it's only atrophied from there. My guess is that they hoped the 4k base would serve as a jumping off point and it would go up from there, reach parity with BTC, and then go beyond and become "the true bitcoin". This would be a lot harder @ $350 when BTC was ~$20k. It didn't work.

                    [–]easypak-100 3 points4 points  (1 child)

                    at any 'normal' company the employees responsible for early bch listing f'up would be fired, but since this is coinbase and the decision came from Brian Armstrong... we just get bullshit excuses

                    [–]Bipolarruledout 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                    It never will but I'll take the cheap coins.

                    [–]devopsupyourass 5 points6 points  (6 children)

                    It wasn’t insider trading. Coinbase mistakenly revealed they were adding BCH through their public API a couple days before. Lots of people knew. It was posted on reddit even.

                    [–]DrDerpinheimer 17 points18 points  (16 children)

                    Hopefully it bleeds out on its own, but being on Coinbase will prop it up indefinitely, most likely.

                    [–]glurp_glurp_glurp 2 points3 points  (3 children)

                    People will continue exiting if the ratio continues falling. Get much under 0.1 and people will be expecting back down to 0.05-ish and accelerate the process. It would probably oscillate a while around it's all time lows, but the longer it goes without a pump the more people will give up. I would guess by 2019 it's trading for more like 0.02 than 0.2.

                    [–]Beckneard 2 points3 points  (2 children)

                    My guess is it's going to go the same way as Ethereum Classic did. It's just going to slowly fade into obscurity.

                    [–]clubbnbabyseals 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                    i was hoping bcash would shrivel up and dissolve during the correction.

                    [–]__redruM 2 points3 points  (5 children)

                    End the FUD war. The BCH crowd may have learned that you can’t FUD BTC without hurting all of crypto. Heck bitcoin.com had a pro-tether article yesterday.

                    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

                    [deleted]

                      [–]IrishChief2018 7 points8 points  (9 children)

                      Question for the Bitcoin Community - As part of my college course I am currently enrolled in a module much of which is centered around the history of bitcoin . I am completely new to the world Bitcoin and still finding my feet in terms of understanding everything so please go easy on my below post in terms of things that may be wrong or dont fit with your views on bitcoin . As part of the course we are currently looking at the difference between bitcoin and bitcoin cash - if you've a few minutes read the below and let me know whats right and wrong and what else I need to know about the split in the community in terms of parties working in both communities , issues and solutions to both parties ideas.

                      I appreciate any feedback you could give.

                      Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash August 2017 we saw the creation of a hard fork from Bitcoin’s original blockchain ledger. The fork was created as a result of a debate that caused a split into the bitcoin community. The debate was centered around the issue of scalability in the bitcoin blockchain . The following outlines below what I believe to be the arguments presented by both users of Bitcoin and Bitcoin cash on how best to solve the scalability issue . Open to any corrections of details people may have on either sides arguments .

                      The Issue of Scalability.

                      Under satoshis original whitepaper for Bitcoin we know that individual’s transactions are grouped together to form blocks. Each block has its own blockhash made up of four key components 1) The Hash of the previous block 2) A time stamp of the new block 3) The merkle tree root hash which is the method by which transaction are bundled together from the transaction slush pool with the first transaction hash in the bunch being the coinbase of that bundle . 4) Nonce – This is the puzzle minors need to solve in order to complete the block . To solve the puzzle requires brut computing force so minors must expend computer processing power to find the value randomly that satisfies the puzzle. Upon finding the value the blocks hash is then complete and at this point the block is added to the blockchain .

                      When a block is added to the blockchain a miner ie the person whos cpu solved the nonce to create the block is rewarded in two ways – 1stly with the issue of newly minted bitcoin and 2ndly with all the transaction fees that people wishing to send bitcoin transactions to attach to their transactions .

                      The issue with scalability surrounding the blockchain prior to August 2017 was that each block could had a maximum blocksize of 1MB which allowed for roughly 250,000 transaction per day to be processed . The issue was that as more and more people began to use the Bitcoin network it began to run slower as users who were unwilling to pay higher fees had to wait longer for their transactions to be added from the slush to a block and confirmed . How to solve this issue of scalability in the blockchain is what ultimately lead to the forking of the blockchain in August 2017 and the creation of Bitcoin Cash .

                      Bitcoins solution to scalability – Bitcoins solution to its scalability issue include the creation of both Segregated Witness ( Segwit ) and lightning protocols. Segwit was introduced to increase the blockchain blocksize from 1mb to a maximum of 4mb with the current protocol allowing for blocks to be 2mbs in size . Segwit also allowed for the creation of layered networks on the bitcoin protocol that will ultimately lead into the adoption of the lightning network .

                      The lightning network is a way in which payments can be chained together outside of the blockchain. It works by allowing participants to transactions interact only twice with the blockchain ledger , once to open and once to close a set of transaction . In-between the opening and closing participants enforce digital IOUs against one another with either party having the option to end the current transaction string of IOUs and cash out for the balancing amount .

                      Bitcoin Cash’s Solution to scalability . Bitcoin Cash creators changed bitcoins protocol such that the block size was increased from 1Mb to 8MB thus allowing for more transactions to be confirmed in each block helping the network to run quicker .

                      If you owned Bitcoin prior to August 1st 2017 you also own Bitcoin Cash ( I Think) . Because the chains forked I think so do the public and private key address in the underlying system which means if you sign into a wallet that supports bitcoin cash you’ll find some which at the time I wrote this was roughly 952 USD per coin . Is this correct?

                      Thanks for all your feedback.

                      [–]Adreik 6 points7 points  (1 child)

                      Segwit was introduced to increase the blockchain blocksize from 1mb to a maximum of 4mb with the current protocol allowing for blocks to be 2mbs in size .

                      hmmm...

                      The main benefit of SegWit is that it is a malleability bug fix - without it there was a flaw in the protocol whereby transaction identifiers could be changed in-transit prior to being mined, which can be a huge problem for anyone tracking incoming/outgoing transactions, or for people that want to accept bitcoin from an unconfirmed (not yet mined) transaction output.

                      Prior to the SegWit roll-out, blocks could be 1 megabyte in size. Now blocks have a weight limit. The size-to-weight ratio of transactions is variable (also, a person would have to basically design an optimized block in order to get anywhere close to 4 megabytes); there is no way, for example, to fit a higher number of pay-to-pup-key-hash transactions that you could previously. So it is not as simple as just a block size increase. If everyone kept using the pay-to-pub-key-hash transaction protocol there is no effective block size increase and blocks would have to keep being 1 megabyte.

                      The reason for this is that SegWit was implemented in a way that older implementations see the transactions as "pay-to-anyone", while newer implementations see the transaction and know that the signature proving the right to spend funds is formatted in a different way to how it was done previously.

                      The lightening network is a way in which payments can be chained together outside of the blockchain. It works by allowing participants to transactions interact only twice with the blockchain ledger , once to open and once to close a set of transaction . In-between the opening and closing participants enforce digital IOUs against one another with either party having the option to end the current transaction string of IOUs and cash out for the balancing amount .

                      Lightning protocol is extendable to n-parties, not just two. Would not be particularly useful otherwise.

                      [–][deleted]  (1 child)

                      [deleted]

                        [–]IrishChief2018 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                        Yeah I’ve noticed a strong split in the community in terms of believes - depending on which forum I post I get different stories but good for me to see both sides - thanks for the input !

                        [–][deleted]  (1 child)

                        [deleted]

                          [–]IrishChief2018 3 points4 points  (0 children)

                          Thanks for the input - wasn’t aware of ASICboost will look into that !

                          [–]seabreezeintheclouds 4 points5 points  (0 children)

                          Honestly I think posts like this are why btc will fade away and bch will replace it in my view

                          If bch was just ignored, I think people who like bch might have been ok with btc over time, but instead there were disproportionate attacks on bch (and Roger Ver for instance) which has only made it look more attractive

                          [–]killabullit 38 points39 points  (9 children)

                          They should get rid of everyone and everything that competes or disagrees with me..... seriously. What a load of nonsense. The whole point of crypto is that anyone can do whatever they like and what they produce will fly or fall on its merits. Methinks people should focus on getting their own ducks in a row before pointing at the flaws in others.

                          [–]d0ugk 11 points12 points  (2 children)

                          The problem is nothing rises or falls on its own merits. Just look at the graphs on coinbase, they all almost exactly mirror each other, just at different dollar values.

                          If they all stood on their own merits, then shit news about bitcoin wouldn't affect the price of ETH.

                          It has been very rare to see the graphs not almost exactly mirror each other, except for that brief period where bitcoin was tanking and ETH was actually still providing a decent return.

                          [–]killabullit 5 points6 points  (1 child)

                          If that’s true, from the view of a speculator it shouldn’t matter which currency you invest in as they will all go up and down the same.

                          [–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

                          That's not what the article said at all. There's nothing wrong with manning up though and fighting a clear scam.

                          [–]tradingmonk 3 points4 points  (3 children)

                          It's unfortunate that they are trying to hijack the bitcoin name but I am thankful they split, this will show that the on-chain only scaling solution is not feasible. It is a valid experiment, so bcash has reason to exist but it will always be bcash, no matter how hard they try. Eventually bash will fade and be forgotten once bitcoin increases the blocksize in reasonable amounts, step by step with the bandwidth capacity growth to keep the system decentralized and secure, and this only after layer 2 and all the other tech (schnorr, batching, segwit) increase the efficiency of block space usage... Rising the block limit is for lazy devs, better get it right now to build the future and be ready for mass adoption later.

                          [–]TalkChain 6 points7 points  (0 children)

                          They should...but somehow I don't see that happening.

                          I'm surprised they are finally bringing segwit to the exchange.

                          [–]funID 4 points5 points  (0 children)

                          The analysis misses one important thing: Coinbase is not trying to help Bitcoin.

                          Brian Armstrong is trying to kill Bitcoin, hates the distributed development community, owns more in ethers than bitcoins, and is in on the scam.

                          [–]zacktivist 7 points8 points  (14 children)

                          Altcoin discussion. Mods, why is this still up?

                          [–]QPatty 3 points4 points  (0 children)

                          Because they pick and choose. Positive about Litecoin and negative about Bitcoin Cash is allowed.

                          [–]HeffeCo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                          And when Roger finally snaps the real Bitcoin will be the one taking all of the heat...

                          [–]MrTonyBoloney 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                          Can someone explain to me how one would develop a fork for a preexisting cryptocurrency (specially BTC and BCH)?

                          [–]Aceionic 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                          That's fucked up on Coinbase and also the bitcoin site is so misleading, says bitcoin and then bitcoin cash. You forget what you're using and if you're not really into this you'll fall for it and think you're buying something else or say that bitcoin is at $800 instead of the $8000 it is at. Shady as fuck, as users said below.

                          [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                          I completely agree! My stepdad who's pretty wealthy was buying around $50k of Crypto. When he saw bitcoin and bitcoin cash he didn't get the difference and partly bought some BCH on accident. When I explained to him BCH, he sold for BTC

                          [–]DJ_Eazy_Dick 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                          Anyone know how I can sell my BCH that I got prefork without exposing my BTC private keys that I'm HODLing on a paper wallet ?

                          [–]Cryptodingus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                          I feel icky just seeing it.

                          [–]Captain_TomAN94 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                          Could not agree more!

                          They had to add it at least briefly so that people could get their "Free hardfork money", but it's time they just get rid of it. It's not going up, it's only going down.

                          Now Segwit is here, and lightning is on the horizon. No such innovations coming from "Bitscam Cash".

                          [–]affirmed_78 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                          Good write-up but coinbase doesn't care. They're about making money, but also their CEO is pro-ethereum and anti-bitcoin. The hasty roll-out of Bcash was done with malicious intent. It's obvious to anyone with half a brain. Why isn't bitcoin gold listed? How bout ethereum classic? Good news is bitcoin has shrugged off everything that's ever been thrown at it.

                          [–]hashparty 1 point2 points  (2 children)

                          Yes. They should dump that shitcoin. But they(CB) are becoming less relevant anyway.

                          [–]Metro01 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                          Bitcoin Cash (BCH) is purposely misleading consumers into thinking they’re getting Bitcoin. The longer it stays on Coinbase, the more it looks like Coinbase is endorsing that scam.

                          [–]CanaryInTheMine 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                          Coinbase and Roger will probably get sued soon by some enterprising attorney who will represent confused buyers who got in at 2500

                          [–]scottfc 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                          Personally I think all major Exchanges should just stop supporting forked coins.

                          [–]baber 1 point2 points  (2 children)

                          'Bitcoin Cash (BCH) is purposely misleading consumers into thinking they’re getting Bitcoin.' Tell me I am wrong but if consumers go to Coinbase to buy Bitcoin they theoretically understand what it is, how much it costs and how it is marked. Why it caused so much buzz at all? Coinbase is not the only exchange that lists Bitcoin Cash. Take bitfinex - https://www.finder.com/bitfinex-exchange-review; kraken - https://coincentral.com/kraken-exchange-review/; cex - http://cryptohoo.com/cex-io-review/ . They also have large market shares and they launched BCH early on, and everyone was fine with it. Can’t get it, really...

                          [–]exab 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                          Well said.

                          [–]Spike-Ball 5 points6 points  (0 children)

                          I bought bitcoin cash when it first started being offered... I wasn't fooled, I knew it was different from bitcoins.

                          [–]sp0j 4 points5 points  (2 children)

                          The thing is Bcash itself isn't a scam. It's the people behind it and their intentions that is the issue.

                          [–]astrogreens 5 points6 points  (0 children)

                          Just like Bitconnect coin. I think I would rather own counterfeit usd.

                          [–]DesignerAccount 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                          Didn't the CFTC and SEC day just yesterday that they will crack down on scammers??

                          Maybe we could alert them and ask them to look into it... or enforce more clarity, or something.

                          [–]magicaIgirl 3 points4 points  (0 children)

                          12 reasons Bitcoin Cash is the Real Bitcoin

                          If I knew nothing about crypto and were doubtful, this headline would convince me that crypto is something fishy and scammy.

                          [–]groupconsensus 2 points3 points  (1 child)

                          The article is right about bcash and its use of r/btc, I thought it was a bitcoin subreddit and only realized it’s actually bcash subreddit after a week of exposure to anti bitcoin sentiment...

                          [–]Lionellyyn 4 points5 points  (2 children)

                          BTC ... BCH... the goal of crypto is to be free to do whatever you want. Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash supporters are like 2 retarded kids fighting each other to tell they are the best... I hold both because I believe in people freedom and if some people want to fork bitcoin to do their own bitcoin and it works, good for them. The whole crypto space work on offer and demand, if there is demand, it means their is an interest. So stop bitching people interests and let everyone be free. I’m not supporter of either BCH or BTC, but both subreddit /r/bitcoin and /r/btc are full of stupid people claiming they have the best bitcoin.... grow up guys !

                          [–]Cardonish 3 points4 points  (1 child)

                          [–]violencequalsbad[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

                          We needed a correction. Market was full of idiots with no clue throwing in $83 and panic selling it 5 minutes later.

                          [–]RekdSavage 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                          BCH is dead #KillTheFUD

                          [–]yogibreakdance 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                          Fuck coinbase

                          [–]nathanweisser 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                          People who think the only thing Bitcoin Cash does is "try to sell Bitcoin at a cheaper price" are severely misinformed or they just don't know the differences between a 1mb blockchain and an 8mb one