Bitcoin - Core (SegWit) vs BU (Bitcoin Unlimited/Cash) vs Other

Discussion in 'Digital Currencies' started by leo25, May 13, 2017.

  1. leo25

    leo25 Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2010
    Messages:
    3,585
    Likes Received:
    1,937
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Lets start talking long term about Bitcoin. what are peoples views and why?

    -Once all bitcoins are mined what will keep the miners going?
    -Will there be enough transactions to make fees alone viable?
    -Will mining get completely centralised?
    -Should Bitcoin allow more then the 21 million limit in order to keep incentives to miners?
    -Should the block chain be culled after a specific size, so not to get to large and unmanageable.
    -Should bitcoin be viewed as a secure savings account and something like litecoin be used as a less secure everyday account?

    Good site to track support is https://coin.dance/blocks

    great talk about it.
     
    BuggedOut likes this.
  2. BuggedOut

    BuggedOut Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2015
    Messages:
    2,552
    Likes Received:
    977
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    New South Wales
    That's a bit long for me atm. Maybe I'll get time to watch it all next week, but I'll throw 2 cents.

    Transaction fees.

    Hopefully so. If the way forward is BU then I'd expect transaction fees to get larger in the long run.

    This is a big risk. I'd expect that Bitcoin may end up adopting Masternodes or other Proof-Of-Stake to enable more people to support the network at lower cost. POW is currently an expensive way to secure the network and other cryptos (like DASH, NEM even Ethereum) will probably show the way.

    Only as a last resort if the other solutions above aren't successful in preventing centralization. The fact Bitcoin is deflationary with a fixed supply is a benefit IMHO. It makes Bitcoin more like sound money without "money printing"

    Yes. There should be a way to reconcile/consolidate the ledger - even if it means a hard fork. Old transactions aren't really needed on every node, just the balances brought forward.

    That's how I see it. Bitcoin can't be all things to all people. Blockchain is a decentralized tech that will enable lots of new innovation with currencies and tokens for different purposes. Bitcoin has first mover advantage and can fulfil the ideal crypto "store of wealth" function. Like gold, bonds or term deposits. It doesn't need to be instant or even cheap. Nobody walks around the street with gold in their pocket to spend, but they keep it in their vault at home, right?
     
    Altima and leo25 like this.
  3. leo25

    leo25 Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2010
    Messages:
    3,585
    Likes Received:
    1,937
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Thanks BuggedOut, interesting to see other peoples views.
     
  4. BuggedOut

    BuggedOut Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2015
    Messages:
    2,552
    Likes Received:
    977
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    New South Wales
    No worries.

    Once you get a few nibbles in the thread you should also post your own :)
     
  5. leo25

    leo25 Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2010
    Messages:
    3,585
    Likes Received:
    1,937
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is why i favor BU, i feel bitcoin needs to be used in a more everyday environment with faster verification times in order to gain more fees to support the miners and at the same time keep fees low.

    I hope so, but atm there is way too much politics, mainly from the core team which is harming bitcoin in the long term. How many people will keep using bitcoin if fees are $50+?

    I hope not, but i have a strong feeling this will happen.

    I personally think a small increase say 3% per year is a good thing. Even gold increases every year. Inflation is only bad when it happen to fast and is unchecked.

    Yes, once the block chain gets too big it should fork over to a new one to remove all the dead weight. They could have a 1 year window for everyone to transfer over and then kill the old chain, there is no need to always keep everything.
    If it stays smaller it would encourage more individual people to store their own block chain, which is a very good thing.

    I'm very mixed on this one. But going back to my first question will fees be enough to support the miners if there is not a lot of transaction happening with it? This is why im happy for bitcoin to increase every year at a small fixed rate. But i guess if you were transferring $5,000 then maybe a $100 fee with a half a day wait time will not be too bad?
     
    Last edited: May 14, 2017
    BuggedOut likes this.
  6. leo25

    leo25 Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2010
    Messages:
    3,585
    Likes Received:
    1,937
    Trophy Points:
    113
    bump.
    This was posted a while ago, but back then there was not a lot of people commenting on cryptos. Be good to get some more people views on this one, now a bit of time has passed.
    Also be interested to hear if anyone has changes there minds or not?

    For me i still favor Bitcoin Unlimited (now Bitcoin Cash) in regards to what is functional now. It's main advantage over something like Dash is its familiar name in the market. But the future might show a DAG based crypto that takes over.
     
  7. leo25

    leo25 Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2010
    Messages:
    3,585
    Likes Received:
    1,937
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Interesting observation that Bitcoin Cash seems to be locked at around 10% of Bitcoin's value. I know my brain likes to wonder, but if feels like there is something deeper going on here.
     

Share This Page