/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>14830106
>I mean its either BSV or Ima neck myself
Good riddance. Crypto needs less non-technical moonboys who fall for the first overconfident hypeman surrogate father figure telling them what they want to hear rather than examining technical details.

BSV is a scam.

>>14009781
>1)bsv is better tech-wise than btc
no it isnt you lying fuck lmao

when was the last time Bitcoin had a 6-block reorg? BSV had a 6-block reorg last month.

>>14009207
Oh and in b4 >the tech is fine
Top kek BSV cucks are truly delusional

Reorg your life like your shitcoin reorgs itself

>>12039643
I sympathise with their perceptions. I can very much understand how from their perspective, it must seem exactly like the situation with BCH / BTC. Here we have some changes to the consensus rules that are causing disruption in the space, so why can't we just stick with the same rules we've always had? If the BTC rule tampering was obviously bad, which we now have a full year's worth of evidence it indisputably was, why should we not believe that the CTOR/DSV rules are going to be equally bad?
That said, the cases are different because the motivations for the changes are different, and the effect of them as well as not implementing them we now have concrete observable evidence in both instances. Even if you assume that every single party on the BSV side is saintly and acting according to their genuine conscience on the issue, the actual result of their rejection of CTOR is that now they can't exceed 10mb constant throughput on their blockstream, and this is exactly what was demonstrated empirically by BU years ago, and BCH in real world empirical stress tests at multiple times prior to the fork. Block propagation optimisation is not like segwit, it's not something going in there to change the architecture and topology of the system, it's to simply make the existing architecture and topology of the system function more optimally, and from what actually happened on the BSV chain *we know that is actually required*.
Just take a step back and even consider *why* it would be other than what we've already proven it is. We both agree that BTC from the start had no intention of scaling on chain, and wanted to hobble the chain to a throughput of 1mb. We know the nature of the actual problems with the on chain scaling, no parallelism in transaction validation, very little work done on large block propagation, etc. And why *would* they do these things when they never wanted the system to ever scale beyond its present limits?

>>12024408
just lol

>>12014327
Imagine being this fucking stupid. Even the most incompetent copy paste fraudulent asshats in the space can scale 10x core on chain, and do you know what 10x core on chain implies in terms of price?
Just... Fucking neck yourself you stupid cunt. You have no fucking idea what's going on and have no understanding of the technical issues you pretend are insurmountable.

>>11988336
Are you a liar, or just ignorant?
Price has nothing to do with scale right now because the market is irrational and has invested in a value proposition that is manifestly false and in fact quite idiotic. When a genuine value proposition is adopted; that is, widespread medium of exchange, price will have everything to do with scale, as long as the properties of the ledger are simultaneously preserved.

>>11921368
And you're almost as fucking stupid as the fuckwit you're making fun of. Get it through your head, your shit doesn't work and you're following a conman, pic related.
Just because core fucked up the engineering work on purpose doesn't mean there is no necessary engineering work to be done.
The hard fork that BSV rejected that resulted in pic related was because they wouldn't accept that there was necessary engineering work to do on the sabotaged core node software. That is the empirical real world result of their failure to actually understand the technical landscape under investigation.
If you were smart enough to escape the sabotage of BTC, you should be smart enough to escape the stupidity of BSV that ends up in the exact same cul de sac.
Alternative layers have absolutely *nothing* to do with it.

*BREATHES IN*

The coin doesn't even work as advertised

hi sirs buy samgushis vision coin, is real bitcoin, buy now sir, is like buying BTC at $100, big blocks make for fast magic transaction, blocks go to 10mb, then 50 mb, then 1gb, then moon gb sirs!!!!!

*BREATHES IN*

imagine actually buying a coin that doesn't work because you like the personality of a hypeman behind the coin and how he "triggers people" on twitter.

>>11907510
>>11907518
>>11907525
>>11907544
>>11907857
>>11907844
>>11908174
itt; how to lose a war and act like you didn't want to win anyway. BCH should've actually attacked back and destroyed them.

>>11905767
> simply
Citation needed.
Nothing changed, but scaling on chain from a project that was designed by the initial developers to never handle greater than a constant throughput of 10mb blocks requires actual software engineering work. Ignorantly upping the limits and trying to throw hardware at the problem solves absolutely nothing, and you have to be a complete brainlet when it comes to technology not to get this.
The science is all laid out very clearly here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SJm2ep3X_M
Everybody told SV that they would run into these problems if they did what they ignorantly did anyway, and that's exactly what happened.
I'm no fan of splits, but there's no saving stupid people from themselves, if they want to secede and do something stupid, you have to let them, if they threaten war to try and make you come with them, you take defensive measures, which was done, and they lost that battle too.

>>11899418
Sure, you keep telling yourself that dickhead.

>>11897776
Removing the speed limiter on your engine doesn't make your car go faster, get it? You actually have to do engineering work to make the machine operate more efficiently. Just saying "LETS GO BACK TO THE REAL THING AND REMOVE ALL THE LIMITS" doesn't get you anywhere. You're talking about software that hasn't even been optimised for local multicore processing of the transaction stream and you think it's just going to magically process unlimited blocks. That is simply not how this works. No matter how powerful the hardware in a node is, if the software is for shit, it will not accomplish anything, and that is the case.
Core never optimised for high volume on chain transactions, and why would they? They never planned on allowing them. So of course their software can't process high throughput on chain transactions, it shits itself at about 10mb throughput, which is exactly where BSV is presently dying despite upping limits and trying to solve the problem by throwing hardware at it.
Read and understand this graph. BSV *DOES NOT WORK* and will not work until optimisation is done at the software level, period. They ignorantly split the network because they're too retarded to understand this.

SVfags are cancerous pajeet shill idiots who don't understand that SV lost as soon as 100% of its threats not only failed to deliver, but they actually re-orged their own chain by accident on account of mining a block that was too big, just like everybody fucking told them they would if they ignorantly raised blocksize without optimising propagation like BU/ABC are doing.
Craig is a brainlet fraudster.

>>11879257
Just no.

>>11878919
That's complete nonsense.
They both want the same thing, one is just run by incompetents who can't actually understand what is necessary to acquire that thing, and thus run full tilt at a wall with the obvious predictable results.

>>11850800
Because they can't.

>>11839996
imagine investing in a chain based on your false perception of the reputation of a conman who professes to be someone else, when back in reality if you look at the numbers said chain just doesn't actually function, period.

>>11839285
> bytes in fake locally generated non-propagated transactions on the wall, x bytes in fake shit txes
> you take one down, pass it around
> oh shit my chain stopped working.

So... SV is actually Bitcoin Soy_ Version

>>11830677
You see? No shortage of stupid cunts in this market.

>>11827425
This too is bullshit. Craig is a malevolent useless little cunt, but at the end of the day that's not what got him fired by BCH'ers. It's pic related. Which *everybody fucking told them would be the result of their stupidity*.
He made threats he couldn't back up in the hashwar and his "attack" to keep the chain unified utterly failed.
And now that the chains are split irreconcilably, he can't even manage his side of the chain at all to begin with.
Why would any stakeholder have any fucking faith in the process that yielded this result? It doesn't require resorting to a personality disorder diagnosis on the head fuckwit, that's just an obvious extra reason to ditch him.