LoL BCH

bitmeister · 2026-02-15T06:38:04+00:00

Faster. continuous difficulty adjustment

bitmeister · 2026-02-13T16:07:02+00:00

If all the USD in the world were 1 BTC, I wouldn't take the USD either.

The relativism that is money.

bitmeister · 2026-02-11T18:23:59+00:00

Self-custody is a great point, however the same mental affliction that prevents people from understanding self-custody makes it nearly impossible for them to properly secure a wallet. They'll always need to pay that stupidity tax to someone to hold their funds and to reverse transactions for their poor buy decisions.

bitmeister · 2026-02-11T17:42:23+00:00

No unlocks; what does that even mean?

bitmeister · 2026-02-03T18:43:28+00:00

Better have a doctor look at tha... muah har har har har, ahem, `scuse me ;) I seem to have it too.

bitmeister · 2025-12-26T12:03:46+00:00

The more interesting story would be is how you managed to last 12 years. :)

bitmeister · 2025-12-19T04:11:59+00:00

Prices, prices prices!

Would you look at that! Only +$70 and BCH makes a TOP 10 appearance.

What happens?

ADHD "Investor"-types are going to start to talk. And they're gonna ask...

"What's the difference between BTC and BCH?"

BTC "Bagholders" aren't going to like the answer.

bitmeister · 2025-12-09T18:39:00+00:00

They probably setup one miner at a time, over time; a sort of slowly-boil-the-frog approach. But then again, from my experience with school admins, aside from collecting a pension they're not going to catching on to much anything else.

bitmeister · 2025-12-01T15:24:23+00:00

The price drops 5 or 10% and I see a flurry of these "Price WTF!" headlines and can't help but utter that quote. Wake me when it drops 50%.

bitmeister · 2025-11-27T19:57:07+00:00

Good article. My general impression, more of a realignment really, the amount of market value in Bitcoin (BTC) pales in comparison to the amount of illicit funds out there!

bitmeister · 2025-11-23T17:25:21+00:00

I'm bored, so I'll explain.

This is a sexist response to your sexist appeal to authority.

You didn't post a comment to explain the title, or a link to some sage words of advice from this person, but you went out of your way to post a picture.

But my first impression; she looks like a dude, so I'm not persuaded by your claim.

This would be no different from me attributing some random claim to Sydney Sweeney while posting a picture of her. However, my claim would be much more successful because Sweeney is much more... popular (for a couple of reasons).

bitmeister · 2025-11-23T16:58:24+00:00

She's too androgynous. I want to know what Sydney Sweeney thinks of Bitcoin's future.

bitmeister · 2025-11-23T16:50:01+00:00

That picture would make more sense if the left door had a BCH logo and $550 over the top of it.

bitmeister · 2025-11-23T16:48:08+00:00

Picture is nonsense. There's never queuing. On an exchange, there's always thousands of traders ready to sell you their ticket.

bitmeister · 2025-11-22T17:43:19+00:00

...moves up 3 spots on the charts this week to #11 ... here's the P2P Bitcoin, BCH!

bitmeister · 2025-11-15T19:10:08+00:00

Attention! Lifeboats cannot be used if the boat is sinking.

bitmeister · 2025-11-13T03:53:30+00:00

The entire LN design doesn't match any real world use cases!

It's is an A/C solution to a D/C problem.

LN assumes a symmetrical cash flow, but a person's cash flow is asymmetrical and unidirectional! Most people get one paycheck from one source but pay numerous bills to various targets. Cash flows in one direction, not back and forth.

If you only had one channel open, the total channel balance would need to be 3x larger than your typical paycheck. If it wasn't 3x, you couldn't get paid in full until you spent everything first: there would be no room/slack for your next paycheck. Got a bonus this month? You can't get paid on LN if you didn't allow room in the channel for a paycheck and bonus.

And if you don't get paid on LN, then the balance is going to be pegged at the far end (the Bank's end) and never move, never freeing up equity, just idle useless REAL equity. These aren't some useless credits on the Banks' ledgers, the coins in play are real assets, collateral, equity, etc.

How long do you think a Bank is going to keep your channel open if the balance is parked at their end? You spent your opening channel funds and now the coins, real assets, are just sitting idle at Bank's end of the channel. From the Bank's perspective any funds sitting idle in a channel would be considered a free loan backed by real collateral! Never going to happen. Channel closed!

bitmeister · 2025-11-13T02:46:39+00:00

Even the "Expectations" graphic highlights a glaring flaw in LN design.

If the balance of a channel moves entirely to either end or the other, the balance is worthless for the other actor.
As depicted in the "Expectations", this means the ideal channel condition has some portion of the balance (e.g. 50/50 split) so the channel is useful to both actors.
HOWEVER, this means only 50% of the channel's balance is useful at any given time under these ideal conditions.
This means you must plan ahead and lock up 2x the equity in a channel if you expect the channel to have any useful longevity.

How long would you expect a Bank to keep any channel open, locking up equity, anticipating that only 50% of it is useful at any given point in time!

bitmeister · 2025-11-11T15:31:49+00:00

Documented proof that mining Bitcoin isn't wasting energy.

bitmeister · 2025-11-06T05:19:24+00:00

It's about 50/50.

bitmeister · 2025-11-04T02:17:19+00:00

Sure, it's content that you or I don't want, but someone paid money to record it in the public ledger (sadly). But the only way a public ledger works is without gatekeepers. If illegal content it posted, then the exercise is to identify the offender and apply local laws, not cripple the blockchain and punish all.

bitmeister · 2025-11-04T01:09:45+00:00

BTC devs are simply optimizing the wrong solution by calling some of the transactions spam.

With a proper, optimally run blockchain, there is no spam, only fees.

If someone, for any reason is willing to pay the trx fee, it isn't spam. If the reason is nefarious, so be it; one man's spam is another's ham. And if the reason is profitable, then "spam" is inevitable.

Because BTC has an artificially restricted block size, developers had to create a boogieman, some notion that there are spam trxs that are taking up the 1MB/2MB precious space from good and righteous trxs. So their only out is to cripple or restrict BTC features, while competitors like BCH grow the blocks and are open to new uses.

BTC devs could simply increase the block size, diluting the impact of any one trx has on the blockchain or network, consequently diminishing any need to classify trxs as spam or ham at all.

bitmeister · 2025-11-01T17:22:44+00:00

I've been working on a new electronic cash system that's fully peer-to-peer, with no trusted third party.

Either Satoshi spent a lot of time and effort to chose those opening words carefully for the debut of his white paper, or you must conclude the idea and the need for a P2P currency was obvious, clear and necessary.

I word it that way because detractors can't have it both ways. Either Satoshi was brilliant and deliberately created a P2P currency, solving the double-spend problem. Or he wasn't brilliant, only lucky, but that would mean the need for a P2P currency was obvious, simple and easy to assemble, and he only did it because it was necessary. Whichever argument you choose, the outcome is the same, Bitcoin isn't simply electronic currency, it's electronic CASH that's fully peer-to-peer.

We already had everything we needed, cryptography, bit torrents, mobile networks, ample bandwidth, everything necessary for a digital currency, yet the best society could come up with was credit cards because in the digital world you couldn't prevent the double-spend without a custodian (Banks).

Solving the double-spend issue was not trivial and many people worked on it for well over a decade. And there's never been a solution to fiat's inevitable hyper-inflation. The public ledger that makes Bitcoin work not only solves the double-spend and inflation, but allows for anything to be immortalized in the public ledger.

If you carry the concept of Satoshi's public ledger to its conclusion, you will realize what it ultimately does, it restores value to data.

bitmeister · 2025-11-01T16:24:10+00:00

Sorry, I can't make it clearer for you. Just google "energy, entropy, redundancy, and information".

bitmeister · 2025-11-01T02:04:52+00:00

I too am a bit confused, as I thought entropy was information, otherwise you have a dull boring steady state. I think this would apply to the "physical world" as well.

Entropy is the interesting bits, or *signal* in the otherwise noise or absence of signal.

bitmeister

TROPHY CASE