Bitcoin Cash Hard Fork Nov 2018 - What You Need To Know
In this video I clearly explain what you need to know for the upcoming November 2018 Bitcoin Cash hard fork. Who are the players involved & how will this play out.
#BitcoinCash #BCH #Hardfork.
Firstly, thanks for watching I appreciate your support! Please like, share and subscribe for more crypto news!
🎓 Join Nugget’s Crypto Community: https://nuggetsnews.com.au/nuggets-crypto-community/
🎧 Nugget's Crypto Podcast
📬 Nugget’s Weekly E-News: http://bit.ly/2MugCwj
📲 Contact Us: http://bit.ly/2tHKKwN
🇦🇺 Own Cryptocurrency in your Self Managed Super Fund
https://newbrightoncapital.com/nugget ("NUGGET" When completing the application)
🇦🇺Australian Tax: https://cryptotaxaus.com.au/
Mention: 'Nugget's News' for discount.
🏦 Need to purchase/sell large amounts of crypto? https://calebandbrown.com/ (Discount code: Nugget's News)
🎤 Hire me to Speak: https://www.linkedin.com/in/AlexSaundersAU/
👕 Crypto Clothing: http://shrsl.com/nf7o
🔐 Secure your crypto
Ecomi: https://securewallet.shop/products/secure-wallet (Discount Code: NUGGET)
🏦 Some of my favourite places to buy & trade coins:
The Chart Guys:
🎓 Crypto Trading Course: Discount code: Nugget10 https://www.chartguys.com/courses/crypto/?ref=5
🎓 Crypto Alerts System: Discount code: NUGGY10
Advanced Trading Courses: Discount code: TCNUGGET10
Disclaimer: I AM NOT A LICENSED FINANCIAL ADVISOR. MY VIEWS ARE GENERAL IN NATURE AND SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN AS FINANCIAL ADVICE. ALWAYS DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH BEFORE INVESTING ANY MONEY.
Just wanted to say this is the first time I’ve seen one of your videos and I’m glad I found you. That is the best video I’ve seen in years! You really know your stuff. A lot of substance 👍 not just reading the news like many others. Great work 🙂
@Crypto Investor I don't own BTC but I am pleased that there aren't huge egos deciding the direction of Bitcoin. Satoshi's anonyminity is the best thing about Bitcoin. As evidenced by negative price on BCH due to the proposed hard fork. Why would you back a coin that is generating its own FUD??
+Crypto Investor Bitcoin has 1000s of nodes and 1000s of miners. Chips have reached their limits and mining is becoming more decentralised everyday. Bitcoin Cash claim they only want the wealthy running nodes, they dont want laptops to be able to run nodes. That to me is far more centralised.
Just strikes me as hypocritical that Nuggets News is a BIG Bitcoin Core advocate, with the devs having all the hash power and massive mining farms making btc core massively centralised.
But on the other hand he claims that bitcoin cash is bad because they want to do the same
Thanks for this i am serious to starting an bitcoin investment but i am a little cautious about the whole bitcoin business and especially how as a grand daughter and daughter of grand parents and a dad who lived through the great depression and also as a teen of the great crash of 1987 when the stock market crashed i am cautious that the next stock market crash is going to cancel all bitcoin miners
Devon van Schoor you need nobody to tell you what to do! Maybe you need some info...
You already can convert your 1 BCH into 1 BCHABC and 1 BCHSV on Poloniex. Why wait for the 15th of Nov? Also, let me clarify that the price of 1 BCHABC and 1 BCHSV is equal to the price of 1 BCH (e.g. 1 BCHABC, which is equal to 0.07 BTC, plus 1 BCHSV which is equal to 0.015 BTC, are equal to 1 BCH, which is equal to 0.085 BTC.).
Have a good day!
Decreasing number of miners and increasing centralization of miners will not affect the security of the network. Ultimately it will be better for the environment because large companies might buy up, decommission, and part out less effective hardware.
Signal trading is an interesting venture unless you constantly fall into loss. Well that could change today. Trading with Mrs Tiffany Warren is the best decision I ever made. I make around £21,000 fortnightly on an investment of £4,000
Thanks for the good information. In my estimation, Bitcoin Chash is dead in the water. I'm testing the Lightning Labs Lightning-App on Bitcoin testnet right now, and it rather gracefully eradicates any use case that Bcash may have had. Lightning Network provides a transaction throughput that Bcash couldnt begin to dream of. It does it in such a way as to maintain decentralisation by keeping the base layer block size low. If you havn't experienced it I urge you to go check it out.
Its cool to be unbiased in a fair situation - but bcash is an ATTACK on Bitcoin. They have pulled hashrate at difficulty adjustments to feed a false narrative that Bitcoin was failing. They have used Covery AsicBoost for an unfair advantage over regular miners, even using the same hardware. Even calling bcash Bitcoin Cash just creates confusion in the space. Roger, Jihan, Craig, Calvin will all go down in history as crooks. UASF proved that they are crooked and do not have the backing - and they have even tried re-writing the history around that historic event in Bitcoins History - do these guys deserve an unbiased view. Fuck no. Alot of the commenters are paid and or fake accounts - just click on them to see for yourself, I think they have done their best, but unfortunately bitcoin was designed to ward off these sorts of attacks, and it has done... Nugg - you should be calling these crooks out, dont even entertain them
+justice4germans segwit2x more popular than segwit ? where are you getting this from? segwit2x was the failed new york agreement.... you need to try and stick to the actual timeline of events, not the imagined conspiracy version. If you believe LN to be a 'convoluted turd', that just tells me that you have little understanding of it. If you are overly opposed to Blockstream, why not investigate some of the other independent implementations of LN? I reccommend LND, by Lightning Labs. I had my doubts about LN from both a liquidity/practical & channel balancing perspective, but after using it for some time, I can honestly say that I am impressed with the level of engineering and quality of the protocol so far. I encourage you to try it.
no, I don't enjoy conspiracy or fraud at all and you have the history wrong, segwit alone didn't get anywhere the support of segwit2x so they cut a deal and only went through with their end of it.. their support of the convoluted turd that is LN was just to buy them time to put out Liquid and they will continue to maintain a bottleneck and celebrate high fees to push people to their platform.. I'm still like 80% invested in BTC but it isn't scaling for use as a payment system for the 3rd world any time soon, if ever.
+justice4germans sounds like you enjoy a good conspiracy. you forget that the initative is open source. it doesn't matter who writes the code. segwit was reviewed and the community elected to persue it. that's why we're on the cusp of enjoying expansive layer 2 scaling solutions like LN.
is Bitcoin Cash their own worst enemy or are the hijackers of BTC now targeting BCH? One or even both sides could have ulterior motives.. CSW making threats without even trying to garner support for SV's proposal as if he always wanted a war. Amaury calling BCH bcash in rBitcoin and being ok with it being considered an altcoin rather than the original as most supporters do.. It's all pretty sus.
I think you're wrong. Do you really expect the man on the street to mine Bitcoin from his laptop in the future? LOL. Bitcoin was never designed to be that way, it is a capitalistic system that is very different from the way you want to describe it in the second half of your video. CSW is often a ---- but he understands how Bitcoin works inside out and this is why he might get an advantage. It is not a nice and gentle system that was designed, but a rather ferocious one where PoW / hashpower is king. Miners will follow what makes sense for them. and BCH can very well be decentralized, permissionless etc. with on-chain scalling. I could go on and on, but let's say that I politely disagree with the second part of your video. Let's see what happens! Cheers
You're not considering that this is decentralisation as it should be. If you don't like proposed changes you fork off and see if the majority follows you. It's a majority vote. With BTC/LN/LBTC this is the exact opposite, as in centralised development on future IOU second layers. You're still looking at this as if this is a bad thing, but it can also be the opposite. Eventually we'll get cryptocurrencies that shook off all the proposals/prominent-figures the majority doesn't want and you're left with what the majority wants, or you're left with a multiple of cryptos(and forks) the majority wants. You're entitled to your opinion, but to me it sounds like you didn't consider all the POVs.
How is it doing that exactly? SegWit broke the digital chain of signatures rule of Bitcoin, SegWit is an altcoin and BTC has it now, meaning BTC is an altcoin. Also, BTC can't scale for anything, and Lightning or Liquid are not scaling of Bitcoin. Remember... Bitcoin is Peer-to-Peer Digital Cash System... which is BCH now and no longer BTC.
Just to be very clear, it is not that some small group of people were not happy with direction of Bitcoin, it was that vast majority of Bitcoin supporters, especially all the early supporters and promoters, were not happy with Bitcoin Core & Blockstream's plan to stop using Bitcoin system (on-chain scaling) for mass adoption, these people were always openly hostile to Bitcoin system and even said it doesn't work, and their idea is to go with a completely different system (Lightning & Liquid) both of which have nothing in common with Bitcoin system, they are not even blockchains. It was then that Core & Blockstream started propaganda campaign against miners, against ASICs, against Bitmain and many others, all of whom were for mass adoption of Bitcoin using Bitcoin system, only Blockstream and their employers in Core team were against it... then using censorship and banning of thousands of people from Reddit r/bitcoin, they eliminated all opposition and they fabricated this user-consensus, which is not even how Bitcoin consensus works.
This is why Bitcoin Cash was created, it was created out of necessity. It then became a problem to try to counter attack the Blockstream's propaganda, which I know you fell for yourself, and educate people about what is really going on, to counter all the lies creeated by Core & Blockstream... Bitcoin Cash is continuation of Bitcoin system, BTC has since been changed into an altcoin with SegWit, because once signatures were removed from transactions, BTC ceased to exist as chain of digital signatures, which is one of the important rules/features of the Bitcoin system. BTC with SegWit is no longer working as Bitcoin system, and only because of it having more hashing power during the split, it managed to keep the Bitcoin name and BTC ticker, but its working principles have changed.
This time round, the hard fork in 15th Nov is not likely to result in permanent chain split, because neither client is adding replay protection, meaning either one side will have to stop mining their client, because they are in minority, or they will have to add replay protection to become a new chain (and will need to get new name and exchange symbol). Keeping up with minority chain will be very costly as majority chain will be able to reject the blocks mined by minority chain as invalid, and every block being mined by minority chain, will get costly (because they won't be able to sustain mining invalid blocks, their rewards will stop). This is why I think BCH won't split, instead it will get an planed upgrade, only the upgrade client will be determined by majority hashing power, ie the miners... which is how real Bitcoin's consensus is done, not that user or non-mining node voting crap Blockstream talk about.
My personal preference for the upgrade is ABC client, but I don't like the addition of these new op-codes as they will do change incentives that are meant to go to the miners, that has potential (not proven though as we haven't reached that stage yet to see first hand effect it will have) to take away transaction fees (portion of it) from miners, because this op-code would reduce the block space needed for such smart contract transaction on BCH blockchain. From the SV client I don't like that they don't have any actual code optimisation, they plan on just increasing the block size limit to 128MB and re-adding remainder of original op-codes that Bitcoin Core removed from BTC (and BCH "inherited" lack of these op-codes also), and I think also increasing script size limit.
I don't like the SV client because just increasing block size limit doesn't fix transaction throughput, some optimizations need to be done on the code, and they don't seem to have any (at least in this release), and I don't like the ides of them wanting to lock-on the code (which is again what Bitcoin Core did with BTC, which his why it became useless, or I should say, with extremely limited usability which can now never allow mass adoption of BTC for anything) because code should be only locked on after the code has been optimised so that it can scale for massive blocks, 1GB at least, so that BCH can handle 3x the Visa capacity and be solid platform for global peer-to-peer money system, which is what Bitcoin was created to be.
I'm not fan of Wormhole either... so there is good and bad on both sides... we'll find out on 15th what miner's have decided and what the outcome will be.
PS: You should know that Lighting (and Liquid) are not working on top of BTC, they run outside of it. L2 protocol is when data of the L2 is embeded and carried by L1 protocol, and this is not the case with Lightning or Liquid. They are not L2 solutions, they are not scaling of Bitcoin, they are completely different systems, and Blockstream using Bitcoin name in both of these ("Bitcoin Lightning" & "Liquid Bitcoin"), is literally a scam because Blockstream is misleading people by using Bitcoin name in their advertising... while both these systems have nothing to do with Bitcoin system in any shape or form.
Also, you can't scale global monetary system in your average Joe's basement, this needs to be run in professional way, as again, we are talking about running and SECURING monetary system for the WHOLE WORLD. That can't be run on crap PC's and shitty internet connections, and you have to maintain the PoW principle in order to achieve decentralisation (the moment you switch to PoS, you've fucked it up, that system will get fully centralised in very short time as people with lots of money will simply be able to buy out shit load of tokens/coins and start dictating what to do next, which will always be for their benefit. PoW system doesn't allow that.
Looking at that perspective I can tell you straight away, that you don't really understand Bitcoin.
The issue is not that small group of people make decisions, issue is that Blockstream are group of people who don't even run and maintain Bitcoin system, instead they want to dictate its code so that they profit from their private sidechains (Lightning and Liquid) which take away from miners incentives, which created BTC being crippled in transaction capacity which literally sealed its fate and it will never be able to be mass adopted, and this was their goal right from the start, because Blockstream are created and funded by bankers, who are the very people that Bitcoin is meant to get rid of.. of course they don't want to see it succeed... you really need to check your logic there as you don't seem to get this (which explains why you still stick with BTC and think that its the real Bitcoin, when its not).
It's all about the motive, the motive of Bitcoin should be to scale and become a cheap, useable global currency. Logic would suggest mining would need to, or tend to professionalize & consolidate first. Then propagate over time as the technology advances, becomes more mainstream/inexpensive.
false. mining should not transform into some inaccessible, high-end service provisom. It should remain basic, accessible, decentralised, and boring. It has a single basic function: provide security to the network. Decentralistion is a necessary part of this prescription. Anything you do to increase the barriers to entry will have a negative impact on this property of the network.
I don't think the Majority of BCH supporters or the community are against 2nd layer solutions, or BIP's that will improve the system, they just wanted to address the immediate problem that bitcoin faces which is scalability which prevents it being used as a fluent payment method. I think the biggest thing to be feared with in the fork is if double spend protections aren't put into place.
Forget political and selfish agendas BCH governance is determined by PoW mining consensus algorithm in conjunction with a specific set of rules that govern the mechanism, thus operating as a Byzantine Fault Tolerant P2P network to achieve thrustless consensus across the network a.k.a classical Nakamoto Consensus. Cheers Alex
Good unbias run down thanks but these debates and changes need to happen to ensure a strong future for crypto not like how BTC veered from true purpose and now we gonna be saved by Lightning Network. And also all the social media stuff are just words very entertaining.
+Nugget's News @Nugget's News
The Bezant Blockchain is a Service platform providing Content developers and e-commerce merchants a disruptive way to sell to customers by:
- Allowing anyone to setup their own Content or Commerce store and send/receive payments from anywhere in the world using local payment methods.
- Proving the BZNT token which will serve as the native cryptocurrency and medium of exchange within
the Bezant platform which will eliminate expensive Store fees (30%) and provides instant P2P payments to merchants.
- Targeting up to 1,000 transactions per second using Bezant’s blockchain. This would enable the Bezant to process more than 2x all of the paid apps sold across all app stores in 2017, globally.
With people like sirgoo lee, former bithumb ceo daesik kim and other great team members on bored i think bezant will make a huge impact
The payment space specifically in the emerging markets is so unreliable and inefficient. also check out jehmi platform
You do not need to calculate payroll premium if your policy is on a stipulated billing cycle.
Sample Payroll Report.
However, if your policy is not yet on a stipulated billing cycle, this is typically what you will see when we send you a payroll report.
A split payroll report is sent when there is an Anniversary Rating Date on your policy, which is the month and day that rates, rating plans and rating systems are initially applied to a policy in force and each annual anniversary thereafter. Your payroll will need to be annotated for each period specified.
Sample Split Payroll Report.
We will need a complete employee job description before we add the classification to the policy. Please do not report payroll in the new classification until it has been reviewed and endorsed to your policy.
Job Duties Questionnaire.
We recommend you keep a copy of your previous payroll reports and payroll records for at least seven years, as you would your tax records.
Submitting Payroll Reports.
There are three different ways to submit your payroll reports.
State Compensation Insurance Fund P.O. Box 7441 San Francisco, CA 94120-7441.
Free payroll reports.