/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>17528649
>person announces they're exiting the conversation for unrelated reasons after you'd ignored their argument and then put up an entirely new one that you wouldn't have even made if you'd just tried to address their argument in the first place
>you proceed to unwarrantedly mock them in a manner that specifically reveals you as a hypocrite
that's a LOW fucking blow, cunt.
>you don't need any "proof of" protocol to validate transactions and come to consensus
whatever you have in mind here, i have no idea; you're not elaborating on your ideas in any meaningful way. what are you saying? you don't need people submitting proof to the ledger? what the fuck? are you five years old? are you drunk? is that the reason for the lack of any clear meaning in your argument, and your unwarranted arrogance?
>also the reason why bitcoin became valuable is because it was the first coin and not because of proof-of-work
i'd say that it's a combination of both the network effect and the fact that mining bitcoin costs thousands of dollars per coin and counting, but hey man we all get what we deserve—and i deserve to have stayed up until 1:32 am answering some ignorant pissant that has no intentions of improving himself

>>17528786
so, you have the few people who want to pay astronomical fees to use the slow lane subsidizing the cost of operating the entire network for everyone else, when there are projects without off-chain solutions implemented that don't punish you specifically for "valuing security". nice value proposition; really keeps the integrity of the original mining protocol intact. but hey, what the fuck do i know—i was enough of a foolish cunt to assume that you genuinely wanted guidance, and now here i am, after having announced to the whole thread that i'm exiting the conversation, being called "delusional" by people who should reasonably expect absolutely no recourse. fucking class act; gold medalist performance in civility from the both of you twats.