/biz/ - Business & Finance

lol bcore

>>9655035

Relevant? Are you implying that I consider any discussion with you meaningful?

>>9606646

By documentation are you referring to the Bitcoin whitepaper as written by Satoshi Nakamoto?

>>9542292

>facts are shilling

Kys, corecuck.

>>9165164
I think you're reading the wrong whitepaper, I'll give you just the first page. Then look at page 2 and read sentence 1 "We define an electronic coin as a chain of digital signatures." Looks like Segwit removed the chain of digital signatures it can't work. Also I said before the reason Segwit is an issue is because once you adopt Segwit Bitcoin is no longer a Turing decider. I can tell by your screaming at me of being a new-comer that you won't understand what a Turing decider is. I'll explain it to you.

You know how Ethereum is trying to do smart contracts on the blockchain? Well on Ethereum they put the entire smart contract on the blockchain which could take up gigabytes. However, on BCH you only put a hash of the smart contract on the blockchain. That means you can do calculations that are gigabytes or even petabytes and store that on the blockchain but only use up a few hundred bytes. Finally the longest proof of work chain lead held by BTC can be reversed. You can't reverse Segwit. That means when BCH overtakes BTC's hashrate BTC can never be called BTC again.

>>9134407
This you idiot, and this is just the first paragraph. Any coin with Segwit does not fit this whitepaper by definition.

>>9051060
Should I add that the first sentence after the introductory parts of the whitepaper defines Bitcoin as a "chain of digital signatures", but Bitcoin Segwit is a chain of digital hashes, meaning it is not Bitcoin.

>>7796449
>If only this was the case.
It is the case.

>>7508897
>fuck off back to plebbit
You're joking right. Plebbit is that place where the Segwit Soyboys get so triggered they just ban BCH supporters. Get off this board newfag, make way for BitCash.

>>7489650
>He said things that are patently false
What a surprise that you didn't list any. What things did he say that were false?
>He fake pumped BCH for the interview so it looks like its 25%
Bitcoin's blockchain can be analyzed through blockchain analysis so if this were true you could see it on the blockchain. For example this is Roger moving coins to Bitfinex a long time ago to purchase BCH. https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@cryp2me/why-does-roger-ver-send-25-000-btc-to-bitfinex Where is the analysis he is behind this pump?
>He lied several times in the interview
You said that already, but once again you didn't bring proof?
>Bcash is centralized, and will always be
Again no proof, and you forgot to mention how the small block developers revoked Gavin Andresen's commit access keys and then ignored the other big block developers (Mike Hearn, Jeff Garzik) in order to consolidate control over the Bitcoin code. By forcing out those who the small block developers disagreed with the Segwit developers centralized Bitcoin Segwit. How is Bitcoin Cash centralized? Who has sole control over any access of that network?
>Segwit is a better solution that original Satoshis plan. Because you know it has been years of development by a lot of smart people
You should read into selfish mining. You can use selfish mining with Segwit to forge transactions and because this form of selfish mining releases blocks to the rest of the network (but withholds signatures) there is no defense and in fact any miner who doesn't join the cartel will be bankrupted.
>The whitepaper is literally a non-argument
That's like saying it isn't fraud if McDonalds starts making soup and sells them as Big Macs. The whitepaper defines Bitcoin and the whitepaper says Bitcoin is Bitcoin Cash.